The author is a historian, sociologist, writer and retired teacher from the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi in the history, sociology, anthropology, political science and international cooperation programs. His research focuses on collective imaginations.
(This text follows the one published in The duty of February 5, The fight against discrimination I — Canadian morality »)
He urges the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) to implement an energetic policy to fight against discrimination, a policy aligned with the major objectives to be achieved and which is inspired by the principles in force, but translates them and applies them to our way. We should aim for an original approach that accords with our temperament, our traditions, our culture, while freeing ourselves from federal dependence and its intolerant moralism.
Our history offers several examples of innovative collective formulas that we have developed, sometimes against agreed paths. Consider how, from the 1960s, we combined the rise of private enterprise with the partner state, resulting in an original form of capitalism. Let us also think of the adoption, during the decades that followed, of neoliberal economic practices in conjunction with the expansion of the social safety net (only for the end of the 1990s, the triumphant era of neoliberalism: drug insurance, day care, parental leave, social housing ). We have also developed a governance model that relies heavily on general consultation in the form of summits. On these three levels, Quebec stood apart from America.
At the same time, trade unionism swelled its ranks, the size of the state was maintained, unemployment declined, the social economy continued to grow, poverty and inequality diminished.
We find a similar phenomenon in the openness of Quebec culture to globalization, a bold maneuver for a culture worried about its future. Quebec has found a way to demonstrate its creativity and export its cultural productions around the world.
Perhaps the most telling example is how closely we have combined fervent nationalism with a liberal ethos and progressive policies. Few nations have made it. In the eyes of many Europeans, this kind of marriage is impossible.
I can testify to that. At conferences in Europe, particularly in France, I reported on what we had achieved. The public showed deep skepticism. In most people’s minds, nationalism was the horrors of the two world wars: racism, xenophobia, genocide and war (this is a formula that President Mitterrand was fond of: “nationalism is war “). Since our example was not convincing, I also mentioned Scottish, Finnish and New Zealand nationalisms… Nothing to do.
In terms of integration and relations between majority and minorities, interculturalism comes from the same spirit: a formula that upsets certain taboos, advocates solidarity, rapprochements and interactions between cultures. Based on a quest for balance, fairness and pragmatism, it strives to connect competing imperatives while leaving great autonomy to social actors. However, none of our governments have wanted to try this formula so far, while in the meantime, Canadian multiculturalism is rapidly gaining ground in Montreal (see The metropolis against the nation? by David Carpentier, 2022).
The fight against discrimination calls for a similar effort: to pursue the same objectives, the same values, in matters of equity and the protection of rights, but following our paths. However, it would first be necessary to clear the field of certain obstacles, in particular Mr. Legault’s aversion to the notion of systemic racism, apparently guilty of making all Quebecers look racist, which is obviously not the case. .
If the expression shocks to the point of slowing down the fight against racism, there is only to circumvent it. Let’s talk about a specific form of discrimination that could be described as trivialized, in the sense that, often unconscious, it is embedded in mentalities, stereotypes, customs, current practices, from which stems a form of institutionalization of fact.
Remember that in the past, Sunday was a day off reserved for worship. But it was Christian worship, without regard for others. It was also the time when women were seen as weak, emotional, unsuited to various responsibilities. Many Blacks and Muslims are currently subjected to similar treatment. And very recently, we learned from the mouths of our governments that immigrants are refractory to our values, reject French, refuse to work and threaten social cohesion… It is on such bases that trivialized discrimination is built.
Another obstacle lies in a radical conception of systemic (or trivialized) racism. Here, the danger is to provoke in the population deterrent effects similar to the excesses of the new multiculturalism. This is not to dilute the notion of racism or water down the policies designed to counter it. It is simply a matter of not arousing resistance for the wrong reasons.
In short, yes for the EDI values (equity, diversity, inclusion), of course, and for the UN Sustainable Development Goals, but modeled and applied in our own way. This would be the right time for a government offensive, the first step of which would be to inventory the reflections and proposals already put forward here in order to extract from them the premises of a Quebec model. An example: to act against discrimination downstream, of course, but even more upstream, as suggested by Patrick Moreau in The duty of February 7.
This is a task that will require a collective effort, including that of university administrations, some of which are very conciliatory with the dictates of multiculturalism in order to maintain federal subsidies. The warning issued recently by Minister Pascale Déry in The duty of January 17 was therefore welcome, as was the objective of “balance” that it advocates.