Civic versus Cultural Nationalism

This one is coming back to haunt me. In an opinion piece in La Presse, (article in French, but Google translate gives a decent approximation in English) I was misquoted by a journalist who heard my interview second hand, then went off on a tangent. I really shouldn't let this bother me, but it does. So, here is my response. An open letter to Pierre Foglia.

M. Foglia, 

In your recent article for La Presse, you used some of the interview I gave to La Presse to another journalist (that was not used in the original article) and somewhat twisted my words. I have read your article, and I understand it, but my lack of French fluency means I am left a little unsure as to the exact tone of the article. I'm sure there is an attempt at humour there, but to what end? Of course, I am not named in the article, but if you have read the original article, it is plain you are talking about me, as I am the only pro-Scottish independence voice in that article.

My reference to the SNP following a civic nationalist model, and the PQ a cultural one, has been interpreted by you as me saying that the Quebecois are not civil. These are technical terms for the types on nationalism that exist in political science, not a statement on the personalities of the nations involved. I won't spell them out here, that's what Google is for. You have taken my words, but not their intended meaning. A wilful mistranslation if you like. I can see how what I said may be construed as an attack on the people of Quebec, but only if they are feeling defensive because maybe, just maybe there is something to the point I was trying to make that is not what you want to hear. I will not defend myself for things I did not say, or inferences taken from a second hand conversation. But I will expand upon what I see as the differences between the two movements and how they relate to the two nations.

The thrust of your article is talking about la Charte, which that the last PQ provincial government tried to pass which was to my mind misguided at best, and downright racist at worst. If it was not the intention of the amendment to be directly racist, it certainly allowed those of the population who were already prejudiced to openly display such feeling towards specifically the Muslim population of Quebec. Indeed the first part of your article is basically defending the right of an old man to be racist towards a Muslim nurse, because he does this in his own home. What right does the said nurse have to leave the old man to wait for another nurse to come because she feels threatened? And anyway she probably "exaggerated her discomfort". To my mind that's not only racist, but misogynistic. Whatever that is, it is not civil.

Please understand, I do not believe the people of Quebec to be racist. I think Montreal is a beacon of multiculturalism. I don't think I personally have spoken to one person here that was for these aspects of the charter. A great number of Montreal institutions came out in public saying they would not enforce it. Indeed it is cited as one of the reasons the PQ lost the last election. This shows the cultural policies of the PQ do not rest easy with a great many of the population of the nation.

The Language laws in Quebec are another a bone of contention for many, and at the heart of the cultural nationalism policy of the PQ. This is a complex subject, and not one I am going to weigh into here in depth. I see benefits to it, indeed, the fact that both of my daughters will be completely bilingual is down to the heavily subsidised french daycare and school systems, brought into place by the PQ. There is no denying this (although the sustainability of such a system is of current debate). I do feel though, that a policy of monolingualism is of great detriment to the francophone population. They are the ones that lose out, as the last PQ government cut spending on English language programs to Quebec schools. Montreal specifically is uniquely placed to have a bilingual population, drawing on both sides of the language divide to create something bigger. If you want to be an independent player on the world stage, especially one on the North American continent, which is massively monolingual anglophone, insularism, protectionism and exclusionism are not the way to go. You want to trade with the RoC or USA, that trade is going to be done in English whether you want it be or not. This does not preclude everyone here speaking French too, why should it? You are aware that people are able to speak multiple languages, yes? In fact, there is scientific research that shows this to be beneficial both to the individual, and to the society at large.

One culture does not have to extinguish all others to survive, that's not how these things work. That is not a model upon which to build a tolerant society. This is the opposite of the ideals that Canada was founded upon. Oh, wait, you want to leave that all behind don't you. Ok, scratch that last comment!

On the civic side, there is this. This is not the SNP, this is some of the many grassroots groups that are working for a Yes vote to build the society they want to live in. I do not say Quebec cannot do this. In fact these kinds of groups may already exist in Quebec, it's just that they have no voice.

I did not say Quebec is a "shitty racist country" to live in. I live here. I choose to live here. I love my life here. Why would I stay if this was the case? But am I aware of those that do not want me to stay here? Yes, they exist too.

Self determination and greater representation are the goals of the Scottish referendum that draw me to the side of the Yes voter. This means all members of the population will have representation equal to their place in society. This is the utopian goal that is spreading hope amongst voters in Scotland. This is the reason I would vote yes. Not because Scotland is a "beautiful civil country" to live in (it can be, but is not always), but because it is trying to do something different from what has gone before. It is evolving.

M. Folglia, I have not met you, nor you me. Please do not put words into my mouth. Please look into yourself and try to see why what I said that has put you on the defensive. What is is about what I said that you are afraid of? Do my words reveal a truth about yourself or your politics that makes you uncomfortable?

Or are you just a grumpy old man?

un Écossais d'ici.

So, from now on, I speak very carefully of the differences between Scotland and Quebec in interviews, it seems they can get quite touchy on the subject. However, I do not believe I am wrong, And it's not just the Scots saying it.