Quebec has given the Covid app the nod so now we’re hooked up.
I listened to the Legault presser at 5. Journalists were quizzing him about the Joyce Echaquan case more than on the state of Covid or the app.
Some interesting highlights from his statements:
1. He had an indigenous great-great-grandmother so he gets along with indigenous people.
2. We don’t have racism in Quebec, because racism is an American thing connected with their enslavement of Black people.
3. There is no systemic, or systematic, racism in Quebec.
A lot of Québécois folks – hell, a lot of white North Americans – have a family legend of indigenous ancestry, but we know it’s often unprovable and the genetic contribution of a great-great-grandmother would be tiny anyway. Someone made a point of researching city hall’s first “indigenous” spokesperson to discredit her claim of being of some amount of indigenous descent; it shouldn’t be hard to work out Legault’s ancestry, since so much work has already been done on Quebec family lines. I’d put $20 on him being pure laine, or if he’s not 100% French he might have one Irish or Scots ancestor, but not an indigenous one.
The “racism is American” line reminded me of the Christian Rioux column in July where he scolded Quebec’s Haitian community for trying to be Black like Americans. First of all, leaving aside the issue that there was slavery here at one time, there isn’t only one kind of racism, and the U.S. having a glaring problem with racism doesn’t absolve other countries and cultures from having their own issues based on different historical factors.
As for systemic vs systematic, I really do think Legault thinks systemic racism means it would be written down in a rulebook somewhere that you have to despise other cultures and treat them badly, and since it’s not like that, it’s not official, it doesn’t exist, and Quebec is in the clear. I think he really does. I don’t know how he can’t grasp that attitudes like those shown at the Joliette hospital are ingrained, handed down in a workplace in a whole package of nasty looks, expressions, remarks, snickers, jokes, disobliging assumptions. But someone has to get this across to the man.
Tim F 06:35 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
The position of premier’s powers and responsibilities are not established by any law or constitution, but by convention. http://www.assnat.qc.ca/fr/patrimoine/lexique/premier-ministre.html
Therefore the premier has no systemic power.
dwgs 09:38 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
I thought it was telling that when he spoke in English he said “we don’t have a system of racism…” Maybe it’s just a bad translation but I immediately thought that he didn’t really understand the concept.
Meezly 10:51 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
I think so too, Kate. Legault is clearly confusing systemic racism with systematic racism.
These concepts are really not that hard to grasp. It’s not like brain surgery nor advanced physics. Neither is making logical and consistent safeguard measures for schools during the pandemic.
JaneyB 10:59 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
Frustrating. I think ‘habitual racism’ or ‘discrimination’ would probably make more sense to someone of his generation. Legault also has a business and accounting background – he’s not going to be conversant with words or concepts like ‘systemic racism’ or ‘intersectionality’ or ‘implicit bias’. It might seem like these are standard but I’m often surprised at how niche they are. Every Quebecois gets ‘discrimination’ however, so I would build off that to make reforms.
Jack 11:07 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
He understands the concept. It is simple, his base see’s itself as the perpetual “colonisé”, in that historical position they are the perpetual victims. It is a status that has fuelled the nationalist movement since the late 50’s. It was written up best by Denis Vaugeois in his White Paper describing why Quebecers should vote Yes in the 80 referendum. Almost all the nationalist rationale was built in a “trail of tears” narrative of perpetual exploitation and discrimination. So Legault simply can not state that systemic racism could possibly a part of Quebec’s reality.
I am looking forward to reading this and maybe at some level a new generation is building another story. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/premiere/emissions/plus-on-est-de-fous-plus-on-lit/segments/entrevue/197828/alain-deneault-bande-de-colons
Meezly 12:04 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
That’s a good point. Whether or not he understands is besides the point. He simply cannot state that because his base is not able to make that logical leap. What a handy way to deny systemic racism. Pierre Vallières has influenced this Quebec mindset for decades yet that book of his is fairly ridiculed outside of this province. This cognitive dissonance will be Quebec’s downfall in this age of Black Lives Matter. But then again, nationalism is also making a comeback. People are seeing Joyce Echaquan as Quebec’s George Floyd. It will be interesting to see how the international spotlight on Quebec will have any influence on Legault because he does seem to be playing both sides at the moment.
Michael Black 12:18 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
Legault has invoked the equivalent of “some of my best friends are Black, but…”
Things can’t be bad because there was intermarriage in his family. But whether it happened,he hasn’t used this factoid to view racism in a different light, or to take this exception to change how he views the world. He’s presented it seemingly to deny racism, which in this case is not just to say “I’m not racist”, but “we aren’t a racist society”
One of the things People don’t like is that people with some family history decide it gives license to spout off. Not only do they not bother to find out the real family history, but it’s usually stereotypes that they mentioned, based on that supposed ancestry. If they took it seriously enough to find that family history, they’d have no choice but to rethink a lot.
Someone will trace his family history, because he’s just opened himself up. People will be curious, and apparently more curious than he is. There’s a maybe relative in BC who is outright native, she told a newspaper that she’s related to my family, her mother is into genealogy.
One thing, the intermarriages are mostly early. Before white women came over. So in Quebec, a long time ago. And given the Mohawk woman who became a saint, I suspect the church kept a tight grip and any native women had to convert to Catholicism first. It was the traders and “explorers”, away from any European mass, who were most likely to marry, and do so on native terms. So it would have happened early in the east, and happened later in the west, but still proceeding settlers. In Red River, all the “good families” had native relatives, except as more people from the east arrived, they imposed racism. After Manitoba came into confederation, the Metis lost their power.
The recentness of Legault’s ancestry seems dubious. I can imagine some relative further back, but he should know before invoking.
But, it’s not about DNA, it’s about relationship.
And yes, there was a recent article about language where the quote from someone sounded identical to what People say about native languages. Except if only 150 people are fluent in which language, it’s not the same as French disappearing.
GC 13:24 on 2020-10-06 Permalink
Even if it’s true about his ancestor, he’s almost proving the point. She was “indigenous”? Was that how specific he was? Does he mean First Nations? Has he bothered to learn which nation or anything about their culture/language?