**New font. Trying it out.
Quebec is making a strong case for Canada to abandon its officially bilingual status. It wants to have its cake and eat it too, enjoying the freedoms of a bilingual nation while enforcing unilingualism at home. Quebecers can express themselves freely across North America without legal repercussions or societal jabs like “parle-moi en français, tokequebecitte.” Yet, they’re increasingly restrictive, even punitive, toward English speakers within their borders.This is a blatant double standard.
Under the guise of protecting French, Quebec’s latest policies—such as denying English in public and workspaces—are growing harsher. Quebec City Mayor Bruno Marchand banned buskers from singing in English. Yes, he did—no need for a double take. This move signals an impulse to eliminate English from public spaces. Discussions among politicians and the Bloc Québécois about “Frenchizing” workplaces suggest English won’t be tolerated at all.Name one Western jurisdiction that does this. I’ll wait.
They don’t, because banning a language violates human rights and freedom of expression. It’s indecent and reeks of insecurity. Quebec can’t claim to respect free speech while threatening fines for using English.Language as a Political WeaponFor years, Quebec’s politicians have used English as a boogeyman to rally “de la souche” voters, claiming French is threatened by a “sea of 300 million English speakers.” This no longer holds water. French is stable and widely accepted in Quebec, yet it remains a cudgel for political gain. Protecting French is laudable (and one I personally share), but using it to vilify English is pure expediency.
Quebecers rail against Trump’s nationalism, like his call to make English America’s official language, without a hint of irony. Trump doesn’t fine people for speaking Spanish; Quebec does for English. Both see a perceived threat which makes the virulent anti-Trumpism all the more misguided if not absurd.
They take things too far, then act surprised when criticized, dismissing it as “Quebec bashing.” Stop doing things that invite criticism, and maybe the backlash will fade. We used to joke that Quebec would ban English from TV and radio. Now, it’s not so far-fetched. If the justification is to protect French by neutralizing the “threat” of English, Quebec is on a path to becoming North America’s most insular region. Economically, policies like the noxious Bill 96 will sink the province further, already languishing in Mississippi and Alabama territory. But at least they’ll do it in French, right? Maîtres chez nous. Continuons.
Another misguided step was when the province attacked English post-secondary education institutions by hiking up tuitions for fellow Canadians. To its credit, other provinces didn't retaliate but maybe they should. How would Quebecers like it if the rest of Canada overtly began banning French 'in the national interest'?
Let's be blunt here. The premise is to promote French institutions at the expense of anglo ones. In other words, Quebec doesn't look on McGill with pride. To them, it's a symbol of 'Anglo oppression'. 'Qui tombe McGill' as one person supporting the move put it.
Not even one of the world's top schools and an honorary Ivy League member is spared when it comes to Quebec's linguistic nationalism.Canada’s Weak ResponseIf Canada weren’t such a weak, yellow-livered, faux-righteous, moralizing, virtue-signaling colony, it would defend its bilingual heritage. Nine provinces embrace bilingualism; Quebec chooses unilingualism. Canada is bilingual because Quebec was a founding province—the original Canada. But it can’t enjoy both sides of the story.
Consider road signs. In Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia (given the Acadian presence), and U.S. states like Vermont, Maine, New York, and Louisiana, bilingual signage accommodates French speakers for safety and respect. Quebec claims its policies are about respect and protection, but respect is a two-way street. They refuse to reciprocate, prioritizing linguistic purity over fairness. The problem with respect and protection is they can easily be used as strawman to eradicate civil liberties.
Try getting an arts grant in Quebec to explore its English-speaking history. Good luck. Meanwhile, Quebecers easily secure federal grants for Québécois culture. This isn’t fair play—it’s a rigged system.
It’s time for Canadians to show some self-respect and either protect English in Quebec or drop official bilingualism as a symbol of cooperative democracy. “We’re officially bilingual! But not Quebec!” The charade is pointless.
Especially with the rise of Alberta secessionism. But that's for another time.
Canada’s Identity Crisis and Economic MisstepsQuebec’s actions loom larger amid Canada’s fragile national identity, especially with fears of American “aggression”. This context exposes broader failures in leadership and policy.
Trump is a shark that smells blood. Past American leaders always knew Canada was a 'wink' satellite country but never bothered to say so. Our negligence and inability to truly foster a Canadian identity and strong economic model weakened our sovereignty. Trump is bluntly calling it out and seeking to exploit it.Economic IsolationMark Carney’s call to unify Canada’s 13 economies is comical given this fact and Quebec’s disinterest in cooperation. Its coercive language laws, like Bill 96, deter trade, with companies avoiding Quebec due to constant legal changes. The province’s economy already lags, and this insularity will only worsen its decline.
Internal protectionism, like bans on American alcohol, reflects a childish mindset. Canadians claim we don’t “need” American booze because we have our own. This ignores personal choice—Kentucky bourbon isn’t Canadian rye, and California wine differs from Quebec’s. It’s paternalistic to dictate tastes, and Canada’s offerings don’t match America’s. Carney should’ve pushed for interprovincial alcohol trade, but British Columbia wines are more likely to reach the U.S. than Ontario or Quebec. If America retaliates, Canada’s wine exports—85–95% to the U.S.—could suffer.
Carney’s plan to expand trade with Europe to counter the U.S. is disingenuous. The U.S. offers unmatched prosperity and protection; Europe can’t compete due to logistics and geography. Pursuing this risks economic disaster.Anti-Americanism and Weak LeadershipCanada’s anti-Americanism, fuelled by leaders exploiting Trump’s election, is deeply concerning. Comments hating Americans for voting Trump are brain-dead, selfish drivel. The American people haven’t changed—they voted, as they did for Biden or Obama. Anti-Canadianism doesn’t exist in the U.S., yet we’re burning bridges. Encouraging boycotts of American tourism could backfire if the U.S. retaliates, hurting our markets. If the government stood up and said they were going to ban travel to the U.S., Canadians would applaud and bark like Pavlovian Dogs like they did during Covid demanding draconian mandates and restrictions.
Canada’s military weakness compounds this folly. With only 21,000 soldiers, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) are a shadow of what’s needed. A 1990s deal left our defense to the U.S. Air Force, and reliance on NATO or Europe isn’t sovereignty. Rebuilding the CAF to 100,000 troops would take a decade. Carney’s 5% military spending promise seems unrealistic. Defense pacts with the UK or France are meaningless—if Russia or China targeted our Arctic, NATO wouldn’t show. Europe won’t challenge America for Canada’s sake.
The fact is, ironically, Trump did the West a favour by jolting it out of its complacency. Don't shoot the messenger because the message is one that resonates with many people in not just America but across the West including Canada. The pundit class calls this "the rise of far right extremism in the age of disinformation.'
It runs way deeper and more complex than superficial takes. But again, this is not the post to discuss this. I have covered it in other posts including the topic of the fall of the CAF. The Digital Services Tax FiascoCarney’s decision to scrap the Digital Services Tax (DST) drew cries of “bowing to Trump.” Good—it was a stupid tax, targeting tech giants generating $2 trillion, roughly Canada’s GDP. Where’s our Apple, Amazon, or Google? Nowhere. If they pulled out, we’d be screwed. Critics would rather hurt consumers than admit our reliance on U.S. tech and defense. That’s not how serious countries act.
What makes the decision to imperilment it all the more bizarre was that the U.S. and Canada were in negotiations and DST was part of those negotiations. Despite American warnings not to impose it unilaterally, Carney saw fit to ignore them and went ahead only to back down soon after.
What was the point of such an impatient decision? The move to rescind it drew howls of derision from the 'elbows up class claiming Carney kissed Trump's ring but it's not that. It was a monumental miscalculation by the Liberals and they ended up with eggs on their faces.
Carney put himself in this position. By cynically making his campaign about Trump and claiming he knew how to handle him, Canadians bought the bit. But here's the problem. The campaign rhetoric simply doesn't jive with the reality of American-Canadian relations. Trump is right when he says he holds all the cards. Well, maybe not all but most of them. Canada has very little leverage. Carney had to have known this or he's not a very good politician or economist. If he did, he did Canadians a disservice by basically creating a vision that puts Canada on an equal economic footing with America. Canadians have disengaged from the reality that we derive our prosperity because of America and in spite of ourselves. The reaction to Trump suggests we had grown too complacent in this arrangement and now find ourselves scrambling tediously navel gazing about what it means to be Canadian again.
This is a concern because too many Canadian now believe we are and that an all-out (unwindable) trade war with the most powerful economic engine in world history is preferable to basic diplomacy and trade talks.
Canada is one of the most interesting minnows in world history. I digress and may expand this thought one day.
We're North American
For a guy who accused his opponent of empty sloganeering, Carney sure knows how to pump them out. Among them is 'make one economy out of 13' and the other is the strange 'we're the most European of the non-European' countries.
If we focus on only Montreal or Quebec City, sure, they do have the most European flavor in North America. Only New Orleans perhaps rivals them. You can feel the strong English, Scottish and French architectural legacy. But it doesn't apply much to the rest of Canada. Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and the Maritimes all have their own "look" but no one would confuse it with being like Europe.
But seriously, who cares?
We're not European. Canadians act like it's an all or nothing or either/or offering when it comes to America and Europe. We seem to put too much reverence into Europe under appreciating its severe economic and social problems while over exaggerating the American ones.
The attempt to 'expand more trade deals' with the EU is a good one but not if it means doing it to cut America out. Europe can't possibly make up for the trade between Canada and the U.S. It can't provide a tenth of what America offers in prosperity and protection. Not sure what Carney is thinking with this pivot.
Canada is NORTH AMERICAN. We don't act much like Europeans - other than Montreal to some extent. Our culture and economic realities are much closer aligned with the United States - logistically and geographically.
Why can't we leave it at that?A Call for PragmatismCanada must stop its emotional tantrums and get real:
************************
Quebec is making a strong case for Canada to abandon its officially bilingual status. It wants to have its cake and eat it too, enjoying the freedoms of a bilingual nation while enforcing unilingualism at home. Quebecers can express themselves freely across North America without legal repercussions or societal jabs like “parle-moi en français, tokequebecitte.” Yet, they’re increasingly restrictive, even punitive, toward English speakers within their borders.This is a blatant double standard.
Under the guise of protecting French, Quebec’s latest policies—such as denying English in public and workspaces—are growing harsher. Quebec City Mayor Bruno Marchand banned buskers from singing in English. Yes, he did—no need for a double take. This move signals an impulse to eliminate English from public spaces. Discussions among politicians and the Bloc Québécois about “Frenchizing” workplaces suggest English won’t be tolerated at all.Name one Western jurisdiction that does this. I’ll wait.
They don’t, because banning a language violates human rights and freedom of expression. It’s indecent and reeks of insecurity. Quebec can’t claim to respect free speech while threatening fines for using English.Language as a Political WeaponFor years, Quebec’s politicians have used English as a boogeyman to rally “de la souche” voters, claiming French is threatened by a “sea of 300 million English speakers.” This no longer holds water. French is stable and widely accepted in Quebec, yet it remains a cudgel for political gain. Protecting French is laudable (and one I personally share), but using it to vilify English is pure expediency.
Quebecers rail against Trump’s nationalism, like his call to make English America’s official language, without a hint of irony. Trump doesn’t fine people for speaking Spanish; Quebec does for English. Both see a perceived threat which makes the virulent anti-Trumpism all the more misguided if not absurd.
They take things too far, then act surprised when criticized, dismissing it as “Quebec bashing.” Stop doing things that invite criticism, and maybe the backlash will fade. We used to joke that Quebec would ban English from TV and radio. Now, it’s not so far-fetched. If the justification is to protect French by neutralizing the “threat” of English, Quebec is on a path to becoming North America’s most insular region. Economically, policies like the noxious Bill 96 will sink the province further, already languishing in Mississippi and Alabama territory. But at least they’ll do it in French, right? Maîtres chez nous. Continuons.
Another misguided step was when the province attacked English post-secondary education institutions by hiking up tuitions for fellow Canadians. To its credit, other provinces didn't retaliate but maybe they should. How would Quebecers like it if the rest of Canada overtly began banning French 'in the national interest'?
Let's be blunt here. The premise is to promote French institutions at the expense of anglo ones. In other words, Quebec doesn't look on McGill with pride. To them, it's a symbol of 'Anglo oppression'. 'Qui tombe McGill' as one person supporting the move put it.
Not even one of the world's top schools and an honorary Ivy League member is spared when it comes to Quebec's linguistic nationalism.Canada’s Weak ResponseIf Canada weren’t such a weak, yellow-livered, faux-righteous, moralizing, virtue-signaling colony, it would defend its bilingual heritage. Nine provinces embrace bilingualism; Quebec chooses unilingualism. Canada is bilingual because Quebec was a founding province—the original Canada. But it can’t enjoy both sides of the story.
Consider road signs. In Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia (given the Acadian presence), and U.S. states like Vermont, Maine, New York, and Louisiana, bilingual signage accommodates French speakers for safety and respect. Quebec claims its policies are about respect and protection, but respect is a two-way street. They refuse to reciprocate, prioritizing linguistic purity over fairness. The problem with respect and protection is they can easily be used as strawman to eradicate civil liberties.
Try getting an arts grant in Quebec to explore its English-speaking history. Good luck. Meanwhile, Quebecers easily secure federal grants for Québécois culture. This isn’t fair play—it’s a rigged system.
It’s time for Canadians to show some self-respect and either protect English in Quebec or drop official bilingualism as a symbol of cooperative democracy. “We’re officially bilingual! But not Quebec!” The charade is pointless.
Especially with the rise of Alberta secessionism. But that's for another time.
Canada’s Identity Crisis and Economic MisstepsQuebec’s actions loom larger amid Canada’s fragile national identity, especially with fears of American “aggression”. This context exposes broader failures in leadership and policy.
Trump is a shark that smells blood. Past American leaders always knew Canada was a 'wink' satellite country but never bothered to say so. Our negligence and inability to truly foster a Canadian identity and strong economic model weakened our sovereignty. Trump is bluntly calling it out and seeking to exploit it.Economic IsolationMark Carney’s call to unify Canada’s 13 economies is comical given this fact and Quebec’s disinterest in cooperation. Its coercive language laws, like Bill 96, deter trade, with companies avoiding Quebec due to constant legal changes. The province’s economy already lags, and this insularity will only worsen its decline.
Internal protectionism, like bans on American alcohol, reflects a childish mindset. Canadians claim we don’t “need” American booze because we have our own. This ignores personal choice—Kentucky bourbon isn’t Canadian rye, and California wine differs from Quebec’s. It’s paternalistic to dictate tastes, and Canada’s offerings don’t match America’s. Carney should’ve pushed for interprovincial alcohol trade, but British Columbia wines are more likely to reach the U.S. than Ontario or Quebec. If America retaliates, Canada’s wine exports—85–95% to the U.S.—could suffer.
Carney’s plan to expand trade with Europe to counter the U.S. is disingenuous. The U.S. offers unmatched prosperity and protection; Europe can’t compete due to logistics and geography. Pursuing this risks economic disaster.Anti-Americanism and Weak LeadershipCanada’s anti-Americanism, fuelled by leaders exploiting Trump’s election, is deeply concerning. Comments hating Americans for voting Trump are brain-dead, selfish drivel. The American people haven’t changed—they voted, as they did for Biden or Obama. Anti-Canadianism doesn’t exist in the U.S., yet we’re burning bridges. Encouraging boycotts of American tourism could backfire if the U.S. retaliates, hurting our markets. If the government stood up and said they were going to ban travel to the U.S., Canadians would applaud and bark like Pavlovian Dogs like they did during Covid demanding draconian mandates and restrictions.
Canada’s military weakness compounds this folly. With only 21,000 soldiers, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) are a shadow of what’s needed. A 1990s deal left our defense to the U.S. Air Force, and reliance on NATO or Europe isn’t sovereignty. Rebuilding the CAF to 100,000 troops would take a decade. Carney’s 5% military spending promise seems unrealistic. Defense pacts with the UK or France are meaningless—if Russia or China targeted our Arctic, NATO wouldn’t show. Europe won’t challenge America for Canada’s sake.
The fact is, ironically, Trump did the West a favour by jolting it out of its complacency. Don't shoot the messenger because the message is one that resonates with many people in not just America but across the West including Canada. The pundit class calls this "the rise of far right extremism in the age of disinformation.'
It runs way deeper and more complex than superficial takes. But again, this is not the post to discuss this. I have covered it in other posts including the topic of the fall of the CAF. The Digital Services Tax FiascoCarney’s decision to scrap the Digital Services Tax (DST) drew cries of “bowing to Trump.” Good—it was a stupid tax, targeting tech giants generating $2 trillion, roughly Canada’s GDP. Where’s our Apple, Amazon, or Google? Nowhere. If they pulled out, we’d be screwed. Critics would rather hurt consumers than admit our reliance on U.S. tech and defense. That’s not how serious countries act.
What makes the decision to imperilment it all the more bizarre was that the U.S. and Canada were in negotiations and DST was part of those negotiations. Despite American warnings not to impose it unilaterally, Carney saw fit to ignore them and went ahead only to back down soon after.
What was the point of such an impatient decision? The move to rescind it drew howls of derision from the 'elbows up class claiming Carney kissed Trump's ring but it's not that. It was a monumental miscalculation by the Liberals and they ended up with eggs on their faces.
Carney put himself in this position. By cynically making his campaign about Trump and claiming he knew how to handle him, Canadians bought the bit. But here's the problem. The campaign rhetoric simply doesn't jive with the reality of American-Canadian relations. Trump is right when he says he holds all the cards. Well, maybe not all but most of them. Canada has very little leverage. Carney had to have known this or he's not a very good politician or economist. If he did, he did Canadians a disservice by basically creating a vision that puts Canada on an equal economic footing with America. Canadians have disengaged from the reality that we derive our prosperity because of America and in spite of ourselves. The reaction to Trump suggests we had grown too complacent in this arrangement and now find ourselves scrambling tediously navel gazing about what it means to be Canadian again.
This is a concern because too many Canadian now believe we are and that an all-out (unwindable) trade war with the most powerful economic engine in world history is preferable to basic diplomacy and trade talks.
Canada is one of the most interesting minnows in world history. I digress and may expand this thought one day.
We're North American
For a guy who accused his opponent of empty sloganeering, Carney sure knows how to pump them out. Among them is 'make one economy out of 13' and the other is the strange 'we're the most European of the non-European' countries.
If we focus on only Montreal or Quebec City, sure, they do have the most European flavor in North America. Only New Orleans perhaps rivals them. You can feel the strong English, Scottish and French architectural legacy. But it doesn't apply much to the rest of Canada. Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and the Maritimes all have their own "look" but no one would confuse it with being like Europe.
But seriously, who cares?
We're not European. Canadians act like it's an all or nothing or either/or offering when it comes to America and Europe. We seem to put too much reverence into Europe under appreciating its severe economic and social problems while over exaggerating the American ones.
The attempt to 'expand more trade deals' with the EU is a good one but not if it means doing it to cut America out. Europe can't possibly make up for the trade between Canada and the U.S. It can't provide a tenth of what America offers in prosperity and protection. Not sure what Carney is thinking with this pivot.
Canada is NORTH AMERICAN. We don't act much like Europeans - other than Montreal to some extent. Our culture and economic realities are much closer aligned with the United States - logistically and geographically.
Why can't we leave it at that?A Call for PragmatismCanada must stop its emotional tantrums and get real:
- Negotiate economic deals benefiting all provinces, not just Quebec.
- Protect English in Quebec or abandon bilingualism’s myth.
- Rebuild the CAF for true sovereignty, not NATO handouts.
- End protectionist barriers like alcohol trade restrictions.
************************
