Month: March 2021

Gibran Khalil Gibran (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kahlil_Gibran), the Lebanese-American philosopher, poet, writer, and visual artist is famous for this quote: ““Music is the language of the spirit. It opens the secret of life bringing peace, abolishing strife”.

Gibran would be turning in his grave right now if he reads about Oxford University’s words on how classical music is “too white” or “colonialist”.

Indeed, this story is real, as reported by several international media today. One of them is an article by Ms. Sophie Durocher in the “Journal de Montréal” entitled “Music is racist” [“La musique est raciste”]:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2021/03/31/la-musique-est-raciste

First, Bambi will present a quick translation of this article. Second, she will share comments of a famous musician and three readers of a French newspaper. Thankfully, they all still have common sense (increasingly rare in today’s world of virtue signalling and woke self-flagellation).

“British newspaper The Telegraph got hold of a report from Oxford University claiming that undergraduate classical music classes are too white and colonialist …

Try to read the following sentences without laughing … and without choking on your coffee.

TOO MANY WHITE NOTES?

“The Oxford University School of Music is considering the possibility of modifying its courses to tackle white hegemony.

University employees see the university curriculum as “complicit in white supremacism” in the wake of the # Black-LivesMatter movement.

Professors consider musical scores to be “colonialist” and believe that the content of lessons should be “decolonized”.

Professors claim that the way of transcribing music “has not shaken off its connection to its colonial past” and that to keep it in its current state would be “a slap in the face for students of colour.” Music writing needs to be reformed to be more “inclusive”.

Oxford professors say classes are too focused on “the music of white European men from the days of slavery,” such as Beethoven and Mozart.

Some teachers have also suggested that we stop requiring the mastery of certain classical music techniques, such as piano or conducting, because these lessons are too focused on “white European music” and “cause great distress to colored students”.

Professors demand that certain courses on Schubert or Guillaume de Machaut be deleted in favour of lessons in African music or popular music. “

No, these quotes are not taken from a comedy magazine or a science fiction novel.

I remind you that Oxford is one of the most prestigious universities in the world.

The only question we have to ask ourselves when we talk about music is that of excellence. Is this composer brilliant or ordinary, did he bring something new to the music?

That his music was composed in the middle of a period of slavery tells us what about the composer’s talent?

We still listen to Beethoven, Mozart and Bach because their music transcends the ages!

Is Mozart less of a genius because he’s white? Is his music less grandiose because he was born in Salzburg on January 27, 1756?

If he had been born in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, in 1983, could his Piano Concert No. 23 have been taught in Oxford? Would that have caused less “distress” to “students of colour”?

Woke “culture” attacks all forms of culture. Looney Tunes cartoons like Beethoven’s music, Little Life episodes like Shakespeare’s plays, Friends episodes or Christmas carols.

We will end up wondering if the “culture” woke likes “culture”.

SELF-HATE

When I read the articles on classical music deemed too white and colonialist, I had images of Mao’s Cultural Revolution in China.

In 1966, the Grand Helmsman banned all Western music on Chinese territory, until his death in 1976, because this music represented “imperialism and capitalism.”

What would Mao say to see that in 2021, it is the West themselves who are self-flagging?”

End of Ms. Durocher straightforward article.

Luckily, the great Zhang Zhang also agrees with Ms. Durocher: “No, classical music is neither racist, nor sexist” (https://www.diapasonmag.fr/a-la-une/zhang-zhang-non-la-musique-classique-n-est-ni-raciste-ni-sexiste-32317).

Now, for the fun of some sarcasm, Bambi will allow herself to translate a few comments by readers of the French Le Point (https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/a-oxford-la-musique-classique-jugee-trop-blanche-et-colonialiste-30-03-2021-2420076_24.php)

“It’s not April 1st

It’s tomorrow. Such nonsense, finally! It is not possible. Although Schubert might have genius, looking at his portraits he was really too white. As Audiard used to say, “those” (I’m starting to be wary of censorship), when we put them into orbit, they won’t have finished turning…“

“What a contempt for “minorities”!

Not allowing minorities access to the geniuses of timeless and universal music … Oxford is there now?

Criticizing classical music is the height of human stupidity”.

“I propose

To change the partitions so that the white and black notes have the same value. I also propose to review the colour of the notes of the piano and other keyed instruments.”

To conclude this post on a musical (ideology-free) note, meet Mr. Rahman El Bacha, a pianist born in Beirut, playing Chopin in France. Bambi hopes you will enjoy his talent as much as she does!

Bambi would like to thank her friend Mary for this lovely video :). It somehow reminded her of a fellow Atlantic Canadian citizen she once happily met at the Beirut airport on her way out of the country. Just like Jenny, he mentioned that he has chosen to move to Beirut because of the Mediterranean sea, the good food, the way of living, etc. She recalls his colourful words describing the view of the sea from his sunny balcony. Bambi hopes he and his family are safe and sound too.

OK, the short video below may make you curious about the place Jenny decided to move to after the Beirut surrealistic explosion. It is called “Batroun“. If you wish, you can admire its charm in the following video!

A couple of days ago, Bambi read the Tehran Times (yes, Bambi reads ALL media in life to remain informed and to learn, including this one). She learned that China and Iran signed a 25-year comprehensive strategic partnership:

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/459283/Iran-and-China-finalize-25-year-comprehensive-partnership

If you are curious like Bambi, here is this famous strategic partnership pact:

http://www.president.ir/EN/91435

Let’s keep in mind that China, which also sits on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action), more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal or Iran deal, has been recently pushing hard for this deal:

https://www.tehrantimes.com/news/456666/China-urges-restraint-calls-for-unconditional-U-S-return-to

Would it be surprising then to read in the 25-year-signed deal China-Iran the following?

14. Both sides recognize terrorism, extremism and separatism as threats against all humanity and the global peace and stability. Emphasizing the necessity for firm and integrated determination of the international community in fighting the three evil forces, they express their readiness to discuss pragmatic cooperation and policies in this regard. They recognize the UN resolution of “World Against Violence and Extremism” (WAVE) proposed by the Iranian President, H.E. Mr. Hassan Rouhani, as an appropriate framework to attain such goals.

E- Regional and International Domain

17- Both sides reaffirm their support for the multi-polarization process of the international system and express their readiness to tackle global challenges and create a world filled with peace and stability. The two sides reiterate their commitment to the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter, especially those pertaining to respecting the national sovereignty and territorial integrity as well as non-interference in the internal affairs of countries. They oppose all kinds of use of force or threatening with use of force or imposition of unjust sanctions against other countries as well as all forms and manifestations of terrorism and believe that controversial or acute international issues should be resolved through negotiations and political dialog.

18- The Chinese side appreciates Iran’s constructive role in fighting terrorism and establishing regional peace and stability. Both sides are of the opinion that peace and stability in this region are in line with the common interests of the International Community and express their readiness to enhance bilateral consultations on major regional issues including the developments in Syria and Yemen crisis as well as the establishment of an area free of weapons of mass destruction and resolution of acute issues through political dialog. They support the will of the countries and peoples of the region seeking political systems and development paths conforming to their national conditions, aiming at realizing their sustainable stability and economic and social development. Both sides support the efforts by the countries of the region as well as the people of Palestine to achieve their rights too.

19- Both sides shall enhance their consultations within the framework of regional and international organizations. China attaches importance to Iran’s effective role as the regional power and evaluates positively Iran’s role in activities under the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and supports Iran’s application for full membership of the Organization.

20- Both sides welcome the agreement reached between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the P5+1 countries on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and believe that the agreement contributes toward guaranteeing the peacefulness of Iran’s nuclear activities and results in the full realization of Iran’s legitimate rights to peaceful use of nuclear energy according to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Both sides emphasize that all relevant parties should implement the JCPOA and the United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 2231 in good faith and in an inclusive and balanced manner and reiterate that they will strive to advance the process of modernization of the Arak heavy-water reactor.

To conclude this post, all the words above would have been beautiful had they not been empty or contrary to what is happening on the ground in the Middle East, and especially in Lebanon. Indeed, Iran is an expert when it comes to war by proxy in the region.

Some of these words even contradict China’s own recent behaviour toward Canada. Indeed, when China talks about “opposition to sanctions”, why did it recently impose sanctions on one of our Canadian Parliamentarians? Thankfully, Minister Garneau denounced this in an official statement on March 27, 2021 (even our PM, despite a history of what looks like an admiration for China. On this one, well done Mr. Trudeau!): https://globalnews.ca/news/7723651/garneau-china-sanctions/

Now, if you still do not believe Bambi, check those sarcastic words of readers of the L’Orient Le Jour quickly translated to English. Bambi has always thought that you get the truth either from children (as they are pure/spontaneous), as per an old Lebanese saying, OR from the citizen’s comments (when this section is open in the mainstream media ?):

https://www.lorientlejour.com/article/1256784/iran-et-chine-ont-signe-a-teheran-un-pacte-de-cooperation-strategique-de-25-ans.html

“Good news for the bearded [he is referring to the Head of the Hezbollah] 6-foot-under [where he is often being reported to be hiding, when not visiting Iran] and his blind flock except for looking east. No doubt that in the broad outline of this divine pact will be specified the details to finalize the sale of Lebanon” (Reader # 1: R. M).

“Very beneficial exchanges, the Iranians will export in China the archaic darkness of which they are the carriers and the Chinese in Iran the tyranny of the peoples of which they are the experts [he is likely referring to the Uighurs]” (Reader # 2: E.L.A.)

Thank you Dr. Mathieu Bock-Côté for your wise article published yesterday in the Journal de Montréal:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2021/03/27/petite-lecon-dhygiene-democratique

Here is a quick English translation of this article, as Sunday’s food for thought ?:

“How to hold fruitful political debates? How do you ensure that contradictory points of view can be confronted by getting to the bottom of things while doing so in a courteous and civilized manner?

These questions haunt our democracies today, which fear they will not achieve them.

The argument often heard is this: one should not say such and such a thing not because it is false, but because it might appeal to certain radical sections of the population.

Democracy

This argument does not hold water if you think about it a bit.

Should we refrain from criticizing the excesses of capitalism because it might appeal to left-wing extremists and other gullibles who believe in the communist revolution?

Should we refrain from criticizing excessive sanitary measures because it may appeal to conspirators and other wackies [“farfelus” in French] who see the pandemic as a vast conspiracy?

Should we refrain from criticizing mass immigration policies because it might appeal to the xenophobic margins of our society?

Should we refrain from criticizing sovereignists when they become folklore because ultra-federalists will take the opportunity to put independence on trial?

Should we refrain from criticizing Canadian federalism which condemns francophones to extinction on the pretext that it would please those nostalgic for the FLQ [= Front de Libération du Québec]?

We understand the idea: our democracy should not refrain from debating important issues on the pretext that marginal movements seek to instrumentalize them.

Debates

The extremes should not be given the privilege of defining what can and cannot be addressed and hold the public conversation hostage.

Let’s summarize: when we talk about an idea, we should not ask ourselves whether it appeals to this or that movement, but whether it is true or false, and how it can contribute to the strengthening of the common good.

Call it a lesson in democratic hygiene.”

We learned this week that the Honourable Minister Garneau, Minister of Foreign Affairs, called his Lebanese counterpart, Mr. Charbel Wehbe:

https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2021/03/minister-garneau-speaks-with-lebanons-minister-of-foreign-affairs-charbel-wehbe.html

First, Bambi would like to thank Mr. Garneau for re-affirming Canada’s friendship with and continuous support of the people of Lebanon.

Bravo for reiterating “Canada’s desire that Lebanon forms a new government without delay to implement necessary reforms and respond to the aspiration of the Lebanese people“. Mr. Garneau talked about the crucial need for “holding Lebanon’s next round of national elections as scheduled in 2022“.

As per our government’s official website above, “Minister Wehbe thanked Canada for its steadfast support of Lebanon and its contribution of $30 million to assist with the aftermath of the devastating Beirut explosion“.

Bravo again to Mr. Garneau for having “reasserted the importance of achieving justice for the victims of this tragedy though a credible and transparent investigation“.

Bambi is also very happy to read that Mr. Garneau “also called for a credible, impartial and independent investigation into the assassination of civil society activist Lokman Slim“.

Today, we also learned from the Lebanese media that the US Ambassador in Beirut, Ms. Dorothy Shea, used the Arabic word “Khalass” in her message to the Lebanese politicians. Khalass means: “Enough is enough!”

Perhaps the sad political reality of Lebanon right now is that the current American administration does not seem to be as impatient as Ms. Shea, when it comes to the feuding Lebanese politicians and, most importantly, to Iran that has an increased (and almost total hegemony) over tiny bankrupt and fragilized Lebanon.

It would be fair to say that the European pressures, under the leadership of France, remain just (harsh) words or diplomatic calls for action… but still without concrete measures, according to the l’Orient Le Jour: https://www.lorientlejour.com/article/1256761/pressions-europeennes-sur-le-liban-toujours-pas-de-mesures-concretes.html

Same for the International Monetary Fund (IMF), according to L‘Orient Today: https://today.lorientlejour.com/article/1256617/the-imf-urges-quick-cabinet-formation-calling-it-critical-to-implementing-reforms.html

Are words enough to provoke change or stop destruction?

First, Bambi would like to thank her friend Aline for sharing this moving video.

Second, Bambi would like to take a break from sadness about Lebanon to wish Tina a Happy Birthday :). Much love to you and to your family (= Bambi’s larger family!).

Third, here is a moving song that Bambi adores by our own Mr. Mario Pelchat. The latter had the chance to perform in Beirut several times over his international career. He loves Lebanon from the bottom of his heart… and Lebanon loves him back. Thank you Mr. Pelchat for your beautiful values and talent. If she may, she would like to offer your song to the people of Lebanon. As she has been saying to her loved ones since her last trip in December, 2019 and perhaps through this blog too, “the cloud will move”. For now, sadly, the sunshine is still hidden behind.

Below, you can find the song, with a quick translation of its lyrics. This is followed by the French original words.

A quick translation of “the Cedars of Lebanon” (by Mr. Mario Pelchat)

“Gaping holes

Like anthills where homeless roam

Where the people of Phenicia once lived

From the East of blood, genes and Arabian language

Screams, tears

And rage in the heart for so much violence

While we swim elsewhere under rains of abundance

It is often when we cry that we experience indifference

What are we going to say

When danger surrounds us,

To our children who question us

Who we try in vain to teach

The verb “to love”?

What are we going to do?

If not find some refuge,

Hope for another flood

Or kill yourself to understand

And forgive

Twilight

Like the life that disappears under the rubble

Another night to invent the end of the world

A new era where you are no longer afraid of your shadow

Sentries

Which remind us that we are not at liberty

On a land that we did not choose to inhabit

Under the wrath of a God we want to appropriate

What are we going to say

When danger surrounds us,

To our children who question us

Who we try in vain to teach

The verb “to love”?

What are we going to do?

Otherwise confide in the stars

Praying to the saints of the cathedrals

Because we are too little to understand

To forgive

A strong people

Who still believes that tomorrow will be different

Like a treasure that a giant knows how to recognize

As are, in the north, the cedars of Lebanon.”

French lyrics of “Les Cèdres du Liban” (by Mr. Mario Pelchat)

«Des trous béants

Comme des fourmilières où errent des sans-abris

Où habitaient naguère les gens de Phénicie

D’Orient de sang, de gènes et langue d’Arabie

Des cris, des larmes

Et de la rage au coeur pour autant de violence

Alors qu’on nage ailleurs sous des pluies d’abondance

C’est souvent quand on pleure qu’on vit l’indifférence

Qu’allons-nous dire,

Quand le danger nous environne,

A nos enfants qui nous questionnent

A qui on tente en vain d’apprendre

Le verbe aimer?

Qu’allons-nous faire?

Sinon trouver quelque refuge,

Espérer un autre déluge

Ou bien se tuer à comprendre

Et pardonner

Un crépuscule

Comme la vie qui disparaît sous les décombres

Une autre nuit à s’inventer la fin du monde

Une ère nouvelle où l’on n’a plus peur de son ombre

Des sentinelles

Qui nous rappellent qu’on n’est pas en liberté

Sur une terre qu’on n’a pas choisi d’habiter

Sous la colère d’un dieu qu’on veut s’approprier

Qu’allons-nous dire,

Quand le danger nous environne,

A nos enfants qui nous questionnent

A qui on tente en vain d’apprendre

Le verbe aimer?

Qu’allons-nous faire?

Sinon se confier aux étoiles

Prier les saints des cathédrales

Parce qu’on est trop peu à comprendre

A pardonner

Un peuple fort

Qui croit encore que demain sera différent

Tel un trésor que sait reconnaître un géant

Comme le sont, au nord, les cèdres du Liban. »

We learn from our Government of NB website that “the provincial government will fund the costs related to establishing a commissioner and their work, estimated at $500,000”.

https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/post-secondary_education_training_and_labour/news/news_release.2021.03.0228.html

We learn from Global News that the Honourable Ms. Arlene Dunn [our Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, Minister responsible for Economic Development and Small Business, Minister responsible for Opportunities New Brunswick, and Minister responsible for Immigration] that all this is “being done for people who live this [systemic racism, she means] every single day”. Even whilst saying the latter, our Minister sounds passionless. Is she really convinced deep inside?

‘More of the same paternalism’: First Nations groups call N.B. systemic racism commissioner announcement ‘disappointing’

She is referring to immigrants, to citizens said to be “people of colour” (like Bambi ?) or “black” or Indigeneous.

Well, even if you thought that this is a good step to address the so-called “systemic” racism, check this CBC article first (without an open section for comments of course). It informs us that “Indigenous leaders have denounced the provincial government’s plan to address systemic racism in New Brunswick, saying they weren’t consulted or even advised”.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/commissioner-systemic-racism-new-brunswick-arlene-dunn-1.5961763

Is and will anyone from our government listen to these Chiefs? And why were they not consulted prior to this decision? What is our government doing? Who is funding this? Our tax money? Or another source? Is our government being forced to do this? And if so, by whom? Or are they true believers of the merit and cost-effectiveness of this one-year highly expensive process? And what is next in a few months, in a year, or in the next few years?

If we look at the mask of Tobique First Nation Chief Ross Perley (CBC picture), it reads “Healing our community”. Is there anything more beautiful in the world than the word “healing” in life? How does this governmental decision, done without consultation with Indigenous people, serve the healing of our NB Indigenous communities?

And what about all the other communities? The French-speaking? The English-speaking? The older, newer, and future immigrants? Don’t they have a say in this? Those who may have voted for this majority government or not?

To come back to the GNB website cited above, it informs us that: “The commissioner will focus on the following objectives:

• “Conducting a public consultation on the nature and impact of systemic racism on racialized, immigrant and Indigenous populations in New Brunswick.
• Thorough documentation of experiences in an effort to gather qualitative and quantitative data – performed through a number of means including, but not limited to, a review of previous recommendations, establishing a dedicated website, holding virtual meetings, receiving presentations and written submissions by email, mail or on the website, in-person meetings with the commissioner by invitation and on request, virtual consultation sessions with foreign nationals, employers and other groups as necessary”.

If our government knows that “systemic racism” is “ingrained” in all its Departments and institutions”, why will it waste our public funds [and we are almost broke] to collect all these “qualitative and quantitative data”. Plus, it is excluding Indigenous citizens from this process? Does this make any sense in our provincial and Canadian context?

Can someone be honest enough to tell us what is happening in our country?

Mr. Mario Dumont’s article, published today in the Journal de Montréal, is entitled “All the minorities… except the francophones” [“Toutes les minorités… sauf les francophones”]. It is a reflection about our contradictory attitudes, whether lucidly or not, toward the francophones in our country. We tend to forget that they are a minority like other minorities. Unfortunately, we fall into the trap of intolerance of their differences in relation to language, culture, approach to addressing social problems or solutions to problems, philosophy of co-existence, and societal choices. We even fall into the trap of self-intolerance… and the latter fuels more externalized intolerance (i.e. of others, namely of their different opinions about this or that issue).

If she may, Bambi would like to take a break from this serious topic raised by Mr. Dumont for a few moments to offer you a beautiful old song she discovered yesterday by pure accident. It remains timely as it is called “Tolerance”. Bambi could not find a clear audio of this song online with the unique voice of Mr. Macias. However, she discovered the talent of a certain Mr. Pascal Leyman who arranged and performed this song. Thanks to him for publicly sharing it.

First, here are the words in English, followed by the original French:

“Tolerance is proof of love and intelligence

Tolerance is respect for life in all countries

Tolerance is to have a lot of indulgence for your neighbour

Open your heart instead of clenching your fists

For no reason for nothing

All forgiven for the tears

Of a child or of a woman

We are never loved

By fear or by severity

Understanding the ideas of others

Without wanting to impose our own

It is in this world a virtue

That we lost

Tolerance is reasoning about the passions of difference

Tolerance means recognizing to everyone their divine rights

Tolerance is the last chance for today’s humans

If they don’t want to no longer live in freedom

in a few years

Despite the many disagreements that still exist between us

Everything can be discussed if we know how to forgive first

Whatever the naysayers of all stripes can write

Mourning the future, I still refuse

Tolerance will eventually win out over backbiting

And on that day, on earth

There won’t be happier than me”

Original French lyrics of Mr. Macias’ song:

« La tolérance, c’est une preuve d’amour et d’intelligence
La tolérance, c’est le respect de la vie dans tous les pays
La tolérance, c’est d’avoir pour son prochain beaucoup d’indulgence
Ouvrir son cœur au lieu de fermer les poings
Sans raison pour rien

Tout excusé devant les larmes
D’un enfant ou bien d’une femme
On est jamais aimé
Par crainte ou par sévérité
Comprendre les idées des autres
Sans vouloir imposer les nôtres
C’est dans ce monde une vertu

Que nous avons perdue

La tolérance, c’est raisonner les passions de la différence
La tolérance, c’est reconnaitre à chacun tous ses droits divins
La tolérance, c’est pour les hommes d’aujourd’hui la dernière chance
S’ils ne veulent pas ne plus vivre en liberté
dans quelques années

Malgré les nombreux désaccords qui entre nous existent encore
Tout peut se discuter si l’on sait pardonner d’abord
Qu’importe ce que peuvent écrire les défaitistes de tous bords
Porter le deuil de l’avenir, je m’y refuse encore

La tolérance finira par l’emporter sur la médisance
Et ce jour là, sur terre
Il n’y aura pas plus heureux que moi»

Now, here the song. Enjoy!

Keeping the spirit of tolerance in mind (ie., bridge building, mutual respect, love, forgiveness, re-discovery… and re-love), please let’s conclude this post with a quick translation of Mr. Mario Dumont’s article:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2021/03/24/toutes-les-minorites-sauf-les-francophones

“The left of English Canada places at the centre of its policy the defense of all the rights of all minorities. They almost make it an obsession. It is this movement that Professor Amir Attaran of the University of Ottawa certainly wants to join.

Officially, this professor fights racism fiercely. In fact, the heart of his remarks aims to stigmatize a group: French-speaking Quebecers. Everything goes: French-speaking Québecers are backward racists. Our past and current governments, our Prime Minister, our laws and even our health care system are manifestations of this wacko Québec society.

I do not intend to elaborate on the case of this provocateur or the administration of the University of Ottawa. The rector is visibly overwhelmed by radicalism in his organization [Bambi agrees with Mr. Dumont, even if she defended Dr. Amir Attaran’s free speech, as you can see in an earlier post at the end of this one. Yes, she happens to enjoy reading Dr. Attaran’s social media, even when she disagrees with him or dislikes his comments about the Québec that she respects, deeply loves, is grateful to for welcoming her family, and is a large part of her complex identities].

Complicit silences

What interests me more is how much good press Professor Attaran has in English Canada, despite his outrageous remarks in their very face. Shouting out loud that Québecers are racists generates few reprimands in English Canada. More like a few approvals and a lot of complicit silences.

For example, Ontario NDP MP Matthew Green shared many of Attaran’s writings on social media. The NDP held a majority of seats in Québec just a few years ago. Yet no one in this party seemed upset to see one of their own insulting Québecers.

At least Justin Trudeau, the one seen as a champion of multiculturalism, was keen to denounce Professor Attaran. Make no mistake, Mr. Trudeau is being blamed outside Québec.

In fact, here is the reality that the Attaran affair puts in our face. The left of English Canada places the rights of minorities at the centre of all its thought and action. Positive discrimination, visible minorities, the fight against racism are the favourite themes of the moment.

There will even be a tendency to scrutinize racism and to find it, even where there is none. To prove the intensity of its determination to fight racism, it is better to find it everywhere.

The minority that can be scoffed at

In short, the left of English Canada defends all minorities… except one: French-speaking Québecers. Obviously, francophones are not a minority in Québec. But francophones in Canada are clearly a minority.

When we look at the situation of francophones from a North American perspective, it is even more striking. Francophones are a minority whose language and culture are under pressure, threatened.

So in English Canada, we will put a capital importance on the preservation of the Indigeneous languages ​​or the languages of all the minority cultures. With good reason. We will be ready to deploy considerable resources to safeguard them.

But the future of French in Canada, in Québec, they don’t care. Attaran’s insults remind us that to protect our language and culture we can only rely on ourselves.”

—

Are elections ahead? Regardless, bravo and thank you Mr. Trudeau for defending Québec. This being said, Dr. Attaran’s free (“Québec bashing”) speech must remain protected!

Québec, la belle province, historically the constant target of attacks from the rest of Canada

Thank you, Dr. Joseph Facal, for your thoughtful article published yesterday in the Journal de Montréal. Thankfully, the latter sill knows how to respect diversity of opinions of its columnists (rather scarce in most of today’s mainstream media). Here is a quick translation:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2021/03/23/censure-il-est-temps-de-riposter-fermement

“Glenn Reynolds, Professor of Law at the University of Tennessee, just published a very interesting opinion in the New York Post.

We make a toy disappear, Mr. Patato, because it would embody “toxic masculinity” [Bambi has a post on “cher Monsieur Patate” ?; as shown at the very end of this post].

We make a cartoon character, Pepe, a skunk, disappear because it would normalize “rape culture” [no comment].

You make a book disappear because it contains a word “traumatic” [how sad and unhelpful actually].

Respond

If we did a poll, asks Reynolds, how many people would approve these censors? 1%? [why is most of the 99% of the rest of the population that afraid of them]?

Who voted for it? At the polls, these claims would get laughable scores, even if one might get the opposite impression from reading the complacent commentators of wokism.

They take advantage of the benevolent and peaceful nature of the vast majority of people, who want tranquility, especially no bickering, who do not want their school children to be in the crosshairs of these horny people.

These reasonable people are s, censoring themselves, hoping that this is just passing foolishness.

In a confrontation between a tolerant and an intolerant, the intolerant starts with a huge psychological advantage: folding is not an option.

Stalin would have already said something like: what is mine is mine, what is yours is negotiable.

Isn’t the time, Reynolds asks, to stop bending and retaliate firmly?

Responding does not mean subjecting these petty tyrants to the vile methods they apply to others.

It is not about demanding their exclusion or their silence.

Rather, it is about attacking head-on their most valuable asset: their moral credibility.

These people, says Reynolds, believe themselves to be superior and believe that the correctness of their crusade justifies their violent methods.

For them, the fight against “injustice” justifies breaking as many eggs as necessary.

Let us stop seeing them as idealists whose good intentions go too far.

Let us not fall into this trap of giving them the upper hand on the moral level.

Let’s undress them [OK, watch out we may see their ugliness ?]. Let’s unmask them. Let us take away this mantle of virtue. Let us refuse reasonable accommodation or submission in the name of their so-called idealism.

Let’s talk to them bluntly. Let us tell them, let us tell everyone that their behaviour is abject, dangerous, detestable, condemnable.

No!

In the history of mankind [or humanity], Reynolds recalls, it is not the benevolent, genuinely humanistic people who burned books, censored speeches, demanded dismissals.

They were frustrated, selfish, psychologically rigid people, devoid of empathy and generosity, often socially misfits, with a spirit of revenge on society because their lives were not what they wanted.

Let us refuse that their frustrations poison our lives.

Let’s raise our heads and say no firmly, as many times as necessary.

Simply.”

—

May the memory of “Monsieur Patate” be eternal…!

We learned from the National Post that Mr. Trudeau said in French “Enough of Québec bashing”! He is on the same page as Mr. Plamondon (leader of the Parti Québécois) finally: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/trudeau-calls-university-of-ottawa-professors-remarks-quebec-bashing

Thank you Mr. Trudeau for defending our belle province!

Bambi has a post on this topic, as you can see further below. This being said, despite any offensive words by Dr. Amir Attaran about Québec and its Prime Minister, his free speech must remain protected. Sam for all his colleagues at the University of Ottawa, regardless of any particular comment, whether in an educational context or on social media.

To conclude this post on a musical and fun note, meant to pay tribute to Québec, here is a symbolic song that Bambi feels like offering to Mr. Trudeau whilst sharing it with Dr. Attaran (Well, M. Legault and Mr. Plamondon will also enjoy it, like her ?):

Québec, la belle province, historically the constant target of attacks from the rest of Canada