Talk about obnoxious...

[Chaerophon]

Hi Pete

Just as you have to live with some of the consequences of your country's history, so do we.    An administrative decision (that really was a Good Idea™ at the time) started this country as a coalition of Upper and Lower Canada, each of which had language rights in place.  There was no diversity - there were two languages supported.

The policy of multi-culturalism has been in place for some thirty-odd years.  Canadians, by and large, do wish to embrace diversity.  Naturally, there are hold-outs among those who fear losing something to it - mainly the Separatists who are losing their lever.  They did not 'embrace diversity'.  However, it would be a mistake to assume that Quebecois = Separatist. 

Further, you do know better than to suggest that anything 'cannot' be used in the game of politics.    ;)
[right][snapback]107031[/snapback][/right]

Not to mention, Occhi's ethical determinism to the contrary, I think that there is something honourable in respecting the language rights of a conquered nation - which is what we have in Quebec, whether we like it or not. I do not believe in the "two nations thesis" of Canadian identity; however, just as we have attempted, in modern times, to "do right" by the natives, I think that certain kinds of accomodation are due the Quebecois - if only as a demonstration of the purportedly "peaceful" deliberative/conversational ideals of Canadian political culture.

The cultural differences between Americans and Canadians are undoubtedly reflected in our responses to such issues. Canada is not a melting pot - but it does have an identity, in spite of our "endless" soul-searching. That identity becomes clear when such discussions arise - our identity (just like any other) is contained in the sphere of questions that are considered "open for discussion" and legitimate in the political and public spheres. Our history has conditioned our understanding of accomodating differences, as has that of America. As a cultural partisan, I believe that our way is "better", and as cultural partisans, the same can be said for Pete and Occhi.

Ultimately, there is no objective way to distinguish between the two. It would seem that the best we can do is communicate these differences in good faith, such that they might be respected. I'm not suggesting outright relativism; only that I think we can each believe that we are "right" without deriding the other *cough* Pete *cough* :D.