Historian, sociologist, writer, teacher at the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi in the history, sociology, anthropology, political science and international cooperation programs and holder of the Canada Research Chair on collective imaginations.
It will be remembered that René Lévesque once said, addressing Quebecers:
“We are something like a great people. In other circumstances, one can imagine that he could have added: “Yes, but…” This is what I am doing today, following up on my text of last December 18 and 19 (” Why I am proud to be a Quebecer”).
The 1995 referendum
I am deeply disappointed that we did not give massive support to Yes. When will there be such an opportunity to enter into the great concert of nations, to assert our assets there and to promote our interests ourselves? In the meantime, we never stop paying for this choice.
The protection of the environment
There is a broad global consensus on the seriousness of climate change and the urgency of taking appropriate action. However, to confine ourselves to our government and especially to the federal government, we do not see in their policies the emergence of this question as being of the greatest urgency. Because, if I understand what we read and hear, it is indeed the fate of the planet?
Instead, we learn that greenhouse gas emissions increased again in our country last year, that they will increase at least until 2030, that world coal production is at a record level and that the Canadian government is preparing to authorize major oil companies to prospect the seabed. Shouldn’t we also be concerned about these development projects exempted from the review of the BAPE? Experts tell us that Quebec is one of the most active states on this front. A less upright mind than mine would deduce that the general level is rather worrying…
Polls show strong support for tough interventions. But are we well prepared for the sacrifices that will accompany them? I am thinking of the changes in lifestyles, the constraints that will weigh on consumption and leisure, the reduction in travel, the end of the culture of the “char”, the shortages of goods on the market, the upheavals in the industry and stock market values, rising prices of many products, etc.
The breadth of this perspective calls for effective pedagogy. Difficult realizations are to be expected as well as fierce currents of opposition to new policies, even among citizens who were initially favorable to them — the experience of the fight against the pandemic and the opposition it has aroused yet teaches us some lessons about the potential for irrationality to be expected.
The future of our talk
The new wave of Anglicisms which is currently sweeping our language — encouraged by what comes to us from France (the “Sorbonne University”…) — testifies to a relaxation that is difficult to explain. More than ever, with globalization, borrowings from English are proliferating. One usage that annoys me in particular is when a speaker inserts an English word or phrase (“as the English say…”) into a text or conversation. Implied: the French expression is too poor (too cheap “), she is not the weight. This process devalues our language. But I am also thinking of the poor quality of the language among students and future teachers.
The fight against the pandemic
After having admired Mr. Legault during the first year of the pandemic, I have become rather critical of him today. My two main reasons are as follows. Why, after announcing a new containment measure, did he wait so long before applying it (example: the ban on non-vaccinated access to SAQ and SQDC stores)? Also, why be so tolerant of non-vaccinated people with dubious motives (I’m not talking about those who have serious reasons)?
Law 21
Attractive arguments present this law as pluralist, egalitarian, anti-discriminatory and feminist. However, we will not change the fact that, in its concrete effects, it almost exclusively affects members of minorities, and especially women. Demographers predict a growth in immigration and therefore in minorities in Quebec, as well as an increase in religious diversity. Will the law resist these changes?
Be that as it may, the Legault government has pulled off a veritable tour de force by placing this law at the heart of the national identity, as a fundamental Quebec value. Thanks to this process, it is now part of the collective heritage to be defended against federal encroachments. It is thus part of the old tradition of our national struggles. At the same time, dissidents become disloyal Quebecers. This is precisely what many of the people recently surveyed by Léger said. A question of law has thus been transformed into a test of patriotism.
Finally, I too find the initiatives coming from English Canada to fight a law that was democratically adopted by our National Assembly very out of place.
An incomplete overview…
Many other evils are to be deplored. I am thinking, among other things, of rising social inequalities, threats to our democracy, the fate reserved for the elderly, the aggressiveness of many antivax, the growth of private education which accentuates a social divide in the population, to one-third of French-speaking graduates who, at the end of their secondary school, enroll in English-speaking CEGEPs, to the gratuitous violence of the new street gangs which will soon get the better of the image of the good-natured Quebecer, to the culture of banishment that incites self-censorship in educational institutions…