• Windows2000Srv@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    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.

        • dlpkl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          That’s just a taste of how badly Quebec’s nationalists try to create a rift. But they’ll be the first to turn around and tell you that Anglos are the problem.

          Cambridge dictionary definition of foreign: belonging or connected to a country that is not your own.

          • Quokka@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yeah totally, it’s not at all a well-known derogatory term used to other people’s.

            Honestly if this is how French Canadians act, I totally get the reputation. Sounds like a bunch of downright exclusionary shit cunts.

        • force@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          2 years ago

          They are foreign though, literally. They are from a different province, plus a very different culture. There isn’t much that separates someone from Alberta from someone from Montana or Massachussetts in that case, other than a passport.

          • Quokka@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            11
            ·
            2 years ago

            So?

            My neighbour is of a different culture than me, yet I don’t think of them as a foreigner.

            I could cross the state border and find someone of a different culture in a different state with different laws, they’re still not a foreigner.

            • force@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              2 years ago

              I mean you can Google the word “foreign” and the first thing that shows up is:

              of, from, in, or characteristic of a country or language other than one’s own.

              of or belonging to another district or area.

              And Wiktionary gives:

              Located outside a country or place, especially one’s own.

              Originating from, characteristic of, belonging to, or being a citizen of a country or place other than the one under discussion. 

              Most Québécois are primarily francophones, while the rest of Canada are anglophones, it checks that box. And obviously Québec is a different district/area than not Québec. And someome from outside of Québec is of course from a different place, both being a different province and a completely different sometimes almost unrecognizable culture.

              Idk man seems pretty reasonable to call them “foreign” seeing as how they’re from a different province. Plus “foreign” is a good catch-all word for anyone who isn’t from the jurisdiction.

              Also yes if you go into another state you are foreign to that state. Not foreign country-wise, but foreign state-wise.

      • C126@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        French is a dead language, just admit it and move on with your lives already Quebec.

    • rivermonster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      Is it federally legal for to discriminate based on language? Don’t know, don’t live there, really curious, though.

      Or is this one if those things that have to be adjudicated in the courts?

        • rivermonster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Thank you for clarifying. English is the official language of Canada, right? I know provences support French, but is it also an official language?

          For instance, in the U.S. there is no national language. Most government forms are provided in MANY languages and/or can be requested in them.

          I’m not sure in the US a university could require language profiency in a specific language. To be fair, though, I haven’t researched it. Maybe somebody can clarify if there are any federally funded ones that do?

          If Canadian universities require conversational French for 80% of grads but the only official language is English, then I wonder what the legal basis is for the requirement? If both English and Fench are official national languages, I understand how that would be the basis.

          Thanks for the conversation, I’m learning a lot.

          • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Canada has 2 official languages, French and English. Provinces can have their own official language and so in Québec it is french

            • rivermonster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              That makes LOTS more sense. Thanks so much!

              Could a province have a first people’s, or other language as their official, if they wanted? Or is the option just the two national official languages?

    • dlpkl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      2 years ago

      That’s all a smoke show. The real reason is their objective of nationalism.

            • dlpkl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 years ago

              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.

                • dlpkl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  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?

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              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”.

        • dlpkl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          2 years ago

          You’ve got an issue with people calling out racists and nationalists?

            • dlpkl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              2 years ago

              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.

              • Quokka@quokk.au
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                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.

                • dlpkl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  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.

              • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 years ago

                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.

                • dlpkl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  It’s really funny how triggered you are. Believe it or not but French speakers aren’t a minority in Quebec. Wild, I know!

            • dlpkl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              Great, then you shouldn’t have an issue calling out the CAQ and the nationalists that support them 👍🏼

                • dlpkl@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  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?

                • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  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.

        • dlpkl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          2 years ago

          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.