|
Royals are welcome but not in good old Quebec (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| The Potter |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
Irish, English and Scots were all part of great britain and her territories at the time. Hardly multicultural. |
History tells us that the Irish hated the monarchy, and since you are saying that the monarchy is part of one's culture, the Irish did have a different culture, so your argument fails.
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
And the US was founded by the same people except that a group of them decided they wanted independence. Quebec is french by virtue of the leniency given to them by the british after conquest. Quebeckers should never lose sight of that fact. |
So, culture and national identity that is forced down your throats, whilst you are looking down the barrel of a gun, is legitimate? Cultural changes are only justified through war and killings? Independent choice and having the free will to follow a certain way of life is a load of tripe? Where's the liberty in that? What happened to getting the government off our backs? |
|
|
| miketg23 |
| Why are all Quebecois being tossed into one basket? It's a group of people who want to protest the Queen's visit not the entire population. I think there are many people, not limited to Scottish and Irish separatists, living within Great Britain itself, that would be less than pleased with a "Royal Visit" |
|
|
| The Potter |
| quote: | Originally posted by ChemEnhanced
That may be very true but I'm tired of hearing how we must continually adopt other cultures instead of them adopting our culture. Maybe it should be up to them to learn the new traditions of their new country instead of us tweaking things to make them happy. |
I bet the native Americans said the same before the British and French turned up, so what's your point? If we are going to be adapting to anyone's traditions, should it not be to theirs? Liberty does not extend to controlling how other people live. In a pluralistic society, once immigrants become Canadian citizens, they have got as much right to contribute to the sense of national identity as the British invaders did a few hundred years ago. If you are arguing that culture is not fluid, try telling that to the native Americans. After turning up at a brief point in the history of this land, what superior and overriding right (compared with the natives and all other immigrants) does this minority suddenly have to force ALL their cultural traditions, including bowing down to a foreign monarch, on every native American, as well as on every other immigrant who follows the same path they did, for eternity?
By the way, as a republic, I am all for a President Gretsky to represent Canada on the world stage :) At least then Canadians can exercise their democratic freedoms to elect someone who uniquely represents Canada's national identity, rather than a monarch who lives in another country, and who the rest of the world associates with England, not Canada. So many great Canadians have contributed so much to this country over the past few hundred years, but never got the chance to be cultural ambassadors for their country; instead, we have got a person who was alive and made a contribution a few hundred years ago, as the present monarch has done sweet FA. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Potter
I bet the native Americans said the same before the British and French turned up, so what's your point? If we are going to be adapting to anyone's traditions, should it not be to theirs? Liberty does not extend to controlling how other people live. In a pluralistic society, once immigrants become Canadian citizens, they have got as much right to contribute to the sense of national identity as the British invaders did a few hundred years ago. If you are arguing that culture is not fluid, try telling that to the native Americans. After turning up at a brief point in the history of this land, what superior and overriding right (compared with the natives and all other immigrants) does this minority suddenly have to force ALL their cultural traditions, including bowing down to a foreign monarch, on every native American, as well as on every other immigrant who follows the same path they did, for eternity?
|
we have left them nice pieces of land where they can do all the cultural pow wowing they want |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Abercrombie
Agreed, multiculturalism is a failure. |
+ 1 |
|
|
| Zyklon_Jay |
| protesters have secured Gerard Depardieu for the event...independance pour nous. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by GGM
My point is the 4 founding groups all hated each other and though it might not seem it to you, their cultures at the time were different from each other. Whether they were under the same monarchy (by force, nonetheless) is irrelevant. They put differences aside and bonded together in order to fight the States. This in essence protected their multiculturalism because they knew that if they lost they'd all be denied that and forced to be American as the situation was in Louisiana as you said.
Canada was founded on multiculturalism was my point and back then the other groups here had no issues letting the French do what they want as long as it was in Quebec. This is well after they lost to the British. I guarantee you they did not want British monarchy visiting their province then, and obviously there are still some groups that do not want them visiting their province now. I really, really and really can not understand how people say that's bad. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and these people are expressing theirs.
I totally agree with you on progress, but this group isn't saying don't visit Canada, they're just saying don't visit Quebec. Tradition for them has nothing to do with the British monarchy so they aren't throwing that away when they say this.
I'm not from Quebec, don't speak French, and as many others I would rather monarchy not visit here either. To me things like the governor general and ties still remaining to Britain are ridiculous. Trudeau did a huge piece by severing many of these ties but we need another one of him to finish the job 100%. If that was said and done and monarchy wanted to visit Canada (with their money, not our taxes) then I'd be all for it. But until those ties are completely cut in my opinion these visits are a step away from progress. I really don't see why on this day any other country outside of Canada should have a legitimate power in our political system and it's an embarrassment that it's the current case. |
trudeau ruined this country point blank |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by yankeeBaby
These comments are interesting considering there were people in Canada and the US lands before a -ton of white dudes came over ;) ;) |
yankeebaby: dont tell me u subscribe to the "everyone who isnt an aboriginal native is an immigrant" theory.
Because population migrations happen throughout history. History is full of nations conquering nations including so called first nations.
Imagine if mexico tried to claim back northern california or china tried to claim back japan? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zyklon_Jay
just like you will cry when we leave your country:D Once again, Quebecers don't generally give a what you guys think of them, so you can feel justified....everyone wins. |
you dont know how good you have it in canada pal...
if quebec ever leaves, its share of the debt alone will knock them into third world status. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
Multiculturalism is wrong and has failed all over Europe... do we need to wait another 20-30 years before we realize it?
We always aspire to Europe in the social sphere, but we look the other way on this specific subject. |
Agreed 100% |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Potter
History tells us that the Irish hated the monarchy, and since you are saying that the monarchy is part of one's culture, the Irish did have a different culture, so your argument fails. |
the irish were not founded by the brits. We were...thats the major difference. Check your history
| quote: | | So, culture and national identity that is forced down your throats, whilst you are looking down the barrel of a gun, is legitimate? Cultural changes are only justified through war and killings? Independent choice and having the free will to follow a certain way of life is a load of tripe? Where's the liberty in that? What happened to getting the government off our backs? |
LOL! ok so then lets have yet another referendum. And once most people vote to keep the queen, lets forget about this. Meanwhile in the real world, geopolitical change is almost always at the point of a gun. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by The Potter
I bet the native Americans said the same before the British and French turned up, so what's your point? If we are going to be adapting to anyone's traditions, should it not be to theirs? Liberty does not extend to controlling how other people live. In a pluralistic society, once immigrants become Canadian citizens, they have got as much right to contribute to the sense of national identity as the British invaders did a few hundred years ago. If you are arguing that culture is not fluid, try telling that to the native Americans. After turning up at a brief point in the history of this land, what superior and overriding right (compared with the natives and all other immigrants) does this minority suddenly have to force ALL their cultural traditions, including bowing down to a foreign monarch, on every native American, as well as on every other immigrant who follows the same path they did, for eternity? |
Um the natives were also conquered. That makes them the loser. That makes the british the dominant culture. Thats how it works. If the natives had won the wars we would see a dominant native culture here. Just like how oregon used to be part of mexico but youd be hard pressed to find any spanish there today. There are thousands of examples in history.
Yes what happened to the aboriginal natives was unfortunate. But thats a whole other topic for a whole other thread.
| quote: | | By the way, as a republic, I am all for a President Gretsky to represent Canada on the world stage :) At least then Canadians can exercise their democratic freedoms to elect someone who uniquely represents Canada's national identity, rather than a monarch who lives in another country, and who the rest of the world associates with England, not Canada. So many great Canadians have contributed so much to this country over the past few hundred years, but never got the chance to be cultural ambassadors for their country; instead, we have got a person who was alive and made a contribution a few hundred years ago, as the present monarch has done sweet FA. |
again to me the queen represents the history that allowed us to be who we are. The british gave us our laws, our government and our way of life that so many people come here desperately to seek. Many from failed states founded by other nations. Again look at the failed states that were founded by other colonial powers compared to Canada, US, Australia that were all founded as full fledged british colonies. There is a reason why french isnt spoken in anywhere but a few tinpot countries. I say the same about spain as well. |
|
|
|
|
