World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Something that people should keep in mind is that the fees were lower for those "out-of-province" students in Québec than in their own province.
This fee raise basically brings it on par with what they would pay in their on province. One of the reasoning behind this law is that Québec shouldn't be subsidizing other provinces way too expensive university system.
If you are living in Québec, university fees are quite cheap, and this doesn't change.
The French vs English aspect is widely talked about, but not a whole lot is mentioned about the actual price hike.
That's all a smoke show. The real reason is their objective of nationalism.
You've got an issue with a cultural minority protecting its culture?
Nice spin
That's exactly what it is though, they would never dare say the same thing about a first Nation community adopting similar rules.
No you see the only groups that get to use the government to hurt other groups is the groups I personally like.
Humans are "meant" to be multilingual. That is norm for us. I still remember the small shock I felt when we were visiting my wife's homeland for the first time and it turns out there is a language with under 6 million people, spoken only in one small region, that she knew plus the most common language of her country.
So yeah this is a group being punished for speaking their own language on land that they originally owned, plus anyone who wants to study there and doesn't speak French. This is freedom? This is a just society? This is education? Schools are supposed to teach not force monolithic thought and punish people for being born "wrong".
First Nations have no French requirements and are allowed to get service in English in Quebec if they want to, that's a protected right.
Also very very funny that you would go from saying "Humans are meant to be multilingual" to "I can't believe they have to learn a second language!"
It's incredible how easy it is to point out the the Anglo hypocrisy.
Then lead by example.
Standard is good behavior not other people.
Because in our treaties and agreements they are quite literally sovereign nations that have the right to self determination. Unlike the Quebecois, they actually were here first, and they really are a minority at risk of extinction. It's so strange how French Canadians can't understand nuance.
You think a group of about 7m surrounded by 360m people that speak another language aren't at risk of seeing their culture disappear?
The Quebecois are also recognized as a separate nation by the federal government, just so you know.
It's so strange how Anglo Canadians can't understand their position in this.
That's awesome, so now we're just pulling random numbers out of the hat. 360m today, 8 billion tomorrow. By that logic, though, Anglo Canadians should have disappeared into American culture huh? Since we already speak the same language. Gee, I wonder why that's never happened.
And just to be clear, the Quebecois are regarded as a nation, french is the official language, the feds are bilingual, and the Quebec govt conduct all operations in French, but somehow they're also at risk of extinction is it?
Random numbers? Oh yeah, sorry... 5 millions French Canadians, 33.5m non French Canadians, 331.9 Americans... So yeah, you're right, my numbers were wrong, 5m vs 367.4m... Oops, it didn't go the way you expected did it?
You're pretty blind if you don't realise that Anglo Canadian culture is disappearing, Quebec produces more original content for its TV than the rest of Canada!
American culture is spreading so much that similar language protection laws are getting adopted in European countries now, same for protection against the spread of Russian in eastern Europe. You just don't care because it doesn't affect you, the proof being that I'm here and talking to you in English instead of forcing you to speak to me in french, which you should be able to do in our bilingual country.
There's 7 million french and native French Canadians ffs. Random ass numbers lol. Nope it went where I wanted and the point still stands but it just flew over your head, like pretty much everything else in this thread.
Anglo Canadian culture is doing just fine despite our politicians not clutching their pearls and blaming immigrants.
You can't even keep track of what your narrative is supposed to be. If Quebec produces more original TV than the rest of Canada, then it's culture isn't disappearing, is it? Write these things down if you have to, you're starting to contradict yourself.
You're speaking English because it's an English sub lmfao. This is exactly the type of Quebecois entitlement that I'm talking about. You don't see me going to french subs and making a point of not forcing them to speak English.
Crazy for you to be talking about entitlement when the first thing you would do when visiting a city in Québec would be to ask for service in English because YOU can't speak the language of the place you are going to and WE have to make efforts to accomodate your lazyness but nooo we are the ones who are entitled
Crazy how you just imagined that entire situation just to make yourself angry lol
Am I wrong though? And I am not imagining stuff, I work with the public, and the number of English customers coming in that are not even bothered to say "bonjour, je ne parle pas français" is almost all of them.
Maybe nuance doesn't translate well into French?
You've got an issue with people calling out racists and nationalists?
Can you explain what racism you are talking about?
The most egregious example would be Bill 21. Absolutely horrendous legislation that does nothing but marginalize those who are already marginalized. Despite what the Quebecois would like you to believe, it's a piece of proxy legislation that aims to exclude religious and ethnic minorities from Quebec society, plain as day.
Just a quick look, that’s just the same as France’s law on religious iconography except only for government employees?
Trying to limit the danger of religion sounds like a good thing to me.
Firstly, this isn't France. We have a charter of rights and freedoms that Quebec used a BS notwithstanding clause to get around so that they could pass the bill. Secondly, there's practical and effective ways to curb the danger of religion without taking a) taking away people's livelihoods b) making them choose between their faith and their job and c) forcing them to move out of the province to find a workplace that doesn't go against Canadian ideals.
Did you read the bill?
Yes, I did.
Who's concerned then? A minority of government jobs, plenty of opportunities for people who want to display a religious sign and worst case there's the private sector if they truly don't agree.
Is it any different from asking the people who have the exact same jobs from not displaying their political allegiance? Both religion and freedom of expression are protected by the Canadian Charter, don't forget that.
So there's an imaginary line in the sand that you've drawn regarding how many jobs are allowed to be denied to minorities? Ever heard of the slippery slope argument?
I thank you for the kind reminder of the existence of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I wonder if the Quebec legislators have ever read it. Have you? Maybe your rights are only protected when you're off the clock eh?
Again, what about political signs? No one complains about that... Weird right?
Quebec made the decision 60 years ago to get religion out of its institutions, only the Catholic Church was concerned at the time but today is a different reality and the Révolution Tranquille is a big part of what makes Quebec what it is today. I don't know why someone that's religious to the point that they wouldn't accept to separate their private religious life from their job would want to represent a laïc government just like I don't understand why an atheist would want to go work for the government in a theocracy.
So your argument is basically that since someone's rights aren't respected at a workplace, they shouldn't work there. Is this a mask off moment or are you starting to realize what the CAQ had intended with Bill 21 all along?
We put limits to people's rights at work all the time and for multiple reasons, wearing a uniform being one of them.
If your religion is so important to you that you can't make the difference between your willingness to display it and your professional obligations when you represent a laïc State and you're in a position of authority (because that's the only people affected by Bill 21), then maybe you should reconsider your willingness to work for said government in that position because clearly you're not in the right place.
It's also very funny that you're basically saying it's ok for a religion/community to force people to wear certain clothes but it's not ok for the State to tell the same people not to wear them. If they were so free to do what they want then removing a religious sign for 8h a day shouldn't be an issue, shouldn't it?
Please point out which rights you're being denied. I dare you. I promise you that there is not a SINGLE right that is infringed upon. A dress code is not protected in the Canadian constitution, however a religion that proscribes religious garb IS protected.
These people you are taking about were born in Canada, and expect to be protected by Canadian law. It's not fair to them that they are now being told to whip into line for a white protectionist government or get out when they were literally exercising their Canadian rights. You can go and argue the rhetoric with the individuals that took those jobs, I really don't care. But you cannot strip away the livelihood of an entire group of Canadians and then go, "Well, what did you expect?!" The rest of the world sees through that bullshit.
Oh the double standards. The religious minorities should be protected at all costs, but the québécois don't deserve that same protection. It's always the ""inclusivity/minority activists"" that are the most against Québec when Québec itself fits inside this very definition. For the common good, please just fuck off.
It's really funny how triggered you are. Believe it or not but French speakers aren't a minority in Quebec. Wild, I know!
Yes, when that's not what's happening I've got an issue with it
Great, then you shouldn't have an issue calling out the CAQ and the nationalists that support them 👍🏼
So it's wrong to be proud of your culture and to expect people that make the choice to live in it to actually want to become part of it?
Absolutely not. When a person receives their Canadian citizenship they agree to uphold the values of the Canadian constitution and they are also afforded the rights that it lays out. Remind me, is the right to freedom of religion included in those documents?
Is the right to force a person to wear specific clothing in there too or is it just ok if it's a religious group or a person's family that choose their clothings?
Are you asking me if the right to enforce a dress code is in the Canadian constitution? Is this a joke or have you lost the plot?
Nothing at all. Please wear a t-shirt that says White Pride on it and put a bumper sticker on your car to that effect also whatever dating app you use make sure it is shown. You can also get a tat that says it on your neck or arm. Please please do this. You know after you scream at a woman wearing a hijab an incoherent scream in that obscure language called French.
See, a judge and a teacher wouldn't be allowed to wear a pin that says "white pride" because in their professional life they represent a State that has specific values and their image must reflect that. One such value of that State is the separation of religion and State.
Can you explain? What do you mean by nationalism?
Anglo Canadians see Quebec's interculturalism as nationalism in the third Reich sense...
The victim complex in action, exhibit A:
Quebec's nationalism involves alienating non-French speaking Canadians including its own residents (eg Montrealers), creating a narrative that Quebec's culture is at risk of being wiped out, reinforcing a victim complex, blaming its own minorities while complaining about being a minority, and by enacting discriminory laws that only aim to exclude those who don't fit their image of what a Quebecer should be.