Here, I suddenly feel like producing a documentary. I would demonstrate that before the 1995 referendum, Quebec nationalism was narrow, xenophobic. That afterwards, it became modern, attentive to minorities. The facts will be true, I swear. But the sorting that I will do, the relative weight that I will give to them, the selection and editing of the interviews will be completely subject to my thesis. I begin.
The darkness. From its inception, the Parti Québécois distinguished itself by its revengeful rhetoric. Its leader, René Lévesque, immediately used the ethnic expression “we others” and never stopped denouncing English-speaking citizens as “Rhodesians”. He stigmatized immigration, to which he attributed the “drowning” of Quebecers. Lévesque had chosen to support him a cursed intellectual, Camille Laurin, who claimed to want “Quebec to be as French as Ontario is English”. Knowing that the linguistic homogeneity of Ontario stems from the prohibition, for a time, of French schools, we measure the cruelty of the project.
Terrorized, Italian-Montrealers resisted until the riot at the will to force their children to be educated in French, the language of lost. The Jewish, Italian and Greek congresses united to oppose the PQ yoke, calling on their people to vote massively for freedom and against oppression. Our fellow Jews had additional reasons to fear for their well-being. “Make no mistake, these bastards want to kill us,” one of their leaders, Charles Bronfman, told them in 1976.
Mordecai Richler, a fine connoisseur of Quebec even if he did not speak the language, announced in the United States that the PQ song was the translation of a Nazi anthem. These concerns were well founded. The infamous Bill 101, in 1977, stripped future immigrants of the right to choose an English school. In the commercial display, it was the total: French, only, had to be seen. All the other languages were hunted down by the ” font language “. Lévesque would also give pride of place to a statue of Maurice Duplessis, the embodiment of conservative nationalism.
The light. The next generation of separatist leaders turned their backs on this great darkness. It was first necessary to establish harmony with Quebec’s historic English-speaking minority. Jacques Parizeau, an Anglophile graduate of the London School of Economics, tackled it with enthusiasm. “English is the lingua franca news, he said. We need to encourage its acquisition. He promised to “kick the ass” of his non-bilingual ministers.
With the help of a member of Irish descent, Jeanne Blackburn, he had Anglo rights included in the PQ platform. Parizeau then inserted in his referendum law more rights for Anglos in a sovereign Quebec than Francophones have in Canada, as well as a right of veto over any changes affecting them.
There was never again talk of Rhodesians, drowning, or banning English from posters. Lucien Bouchard went to reiterate this desire during a historic speech at the Centaur, Pauline Marois broke a taboo by appointing one of her ministers specifically responsible for dialogue with the Anglos.
The second opening task concerned indigenous peoples. It was Bernard Landry who struck hardest, signing a “Peace of the Brave” with the Crees, which Cree chief Ted Moses cited as an exceptional example of harmony. Landry also signed an agreement with the Inuits which opened the door to their autonomous government. The PQ elected the first Aboriginal MP in modern Quebec history.
The post-1995 period also saw an increase in gestures of openness towards Quebecers of immigrant origin. The Uruguayan of origin Joseph Facal became nothing less than President of the Treasury Board. The Cameroonian of origin Maka Kotto, Minister of Culture. A native Cambodian became vice-president of the PQ at the same time as a Gabon-born economist was president.
Above all, an exceptional new alliance was formed between the feminists of the PQ and a group of 150 immigrant women from North Africa. Native and adopted Quebecers have moved Quebec forward towards greater secularism by campaigning together against the display of misogynistic signs by government employees.
End of the documentary on the images of their common demonstration, called “the Janettes”, symbol of the new openness of modern Quebec nationalism.
Enough pranks. The reality is that from Lévesque to today, the PQ has always defined the Quebec nation as founded on its French-speaking majority, which gives heart and meaning to its identity, wishing to welcome newcomers into its midst. This continuity of identity was interrupted for a period of 12 years, from the evening of Jacques Parizeau’s speech on “ethnic votes” until 2007. This tragic speech, for Mr. Parizeau and for us, put the PQ on these issues. defensiveness and made him vulnerable to the accusations of withdrawal into himself that he had always faced. There followed a denationalization of the independence project, a loss, therefore, of the strong reason that founded its existence.
Popular revisionist discourses are nostalgic for the time when nationalism was shameful and on its way to becoming a Quebec clone of Canadian postnational Trudeauism.
Fortunately, with Pauline Marois’ 2007 “Inclusive We” speech, nationalism regained its footing. He has become himself again. He defended secularism and women, before, during and after this period. He was a constant precursor to the First Nations and unflinchingly defended the historic rights of the Anglos. He even recently took up the doctrine of “cultural convergence” invented by Laurin.
It is that he is once again certain of what he is fighting for: for a singular nation, its language, its history, its culture, finally emerging from its shameful period, and which, despite the incessant jokes, does not no more excuses for existing.
[email protected] / blog: jflisee.org