The abolition of a toxic course at last!
Victory!
After nearly fifteen years of fighting the powerful pro-ECR lobby, which dominated and still dominates the Ministry of Education and the faculties of education, Quebec nationalists managed to convince the government to abolish it!
This course was a real propaganda machine in the service of multiculturalism and the ideology of "reasonable" accommodations. The ECR course explicitly sought to indoctrinate children. It will have sown a lot of identity confusion in the younger generation.
I would add that even beyond the question of identity, this course was toxic. Because contrary to legend, he did not transmit serious knowledge about religions. Worse: he proposed an often rigorous and folkloric reading of each religion.
After nearly fifteen years of fighting the powerful pro-ECR lobby, which dominated and still dominates the Ministry of Education and the faculties of education, Quebec nationalists managed to convince the government to abolish it!
This course was a real propaganda machine in the service of multiculturalism and the ideology of "reasonable" accommodations. The ECR course explicitly sought to indoctrinate children. It will have sown a lot of identity confusion in the younger generation.
I would add that even beyond the question of identity, this course was toxic. Because contrary to legend, he did not transmit serious knowledge about religions. Worse: he proposed an often rigorous and folkloric reading of each religion.
Propaganda
Moreover, he argued that Quebec society must adapt to the customs of each, while it is up to the religions that are established in our country to adapt to our mores, our secularism, and our cultural heritage.
He implied that the true Muslim, for example, is the one who wears the veil, as if she were "more Muslim"
than the one who has adapted to Western modernity.
The government will therefore abolish the ECR course. He could have been content to replace him by giving more hours to French and history.
Personally, I would have preferred this solution.
Instead, it will replace it with a course in Quebec culture and citizenship.
It remains to be seen what he will put behind these words, as one can expect the pro-ECR lobby to seek to recycle its old junk into this new format. The government will have to be vigilant and ensure that pseudo-experts do not come to hinder its decision.
But let's take François Legault's proposal seriously: will the government dare to define Quebec culture through its history, its memory, its traditions, its classics, its literature, its songs?
Will he dare to make it a real instrument of national cohesion, to transmit to all the references that
we should never have ceased to have in common?
Because in the face of the Americanization of mentalities and Netflix culture, our identity must resist and be transmitted.
For immigrant populations, first or second generation, who are slow to familiarize themselves with our nation, where they have freely decided to settle, this course will be very useful.
Another question: how will the government define citizenship?
Culture
Because it will not escape anyone that Quebec, for the moment, except in a completely metaphorical way, has no citizenship. It does not have the status or privileges of a sovereign state.
So what will this course cover? Learning about our political system? Very well.
Will he also teach students that Quebec is not a signatory to the Constitution, that the government of judges causes real democratic problems, and that it is not enough for a lobby to claim to speak on behalf of a minority for it to be immediately recognized as "rights"?
I repeat: this course should not become a BIS RCT.
Moreover, he argued that Quebec society must adapt to the customs of each, while it is up to the religions that are established in our country to adapt to our mores, our secularism, and our cultural heritage.
He implied that the true Muslim, for example, is the one who wears the veil, as if she were "more Muslim"
than the one who has adapted to Western modernity.
The government will therefore abolish the ECR course. He could have been content to replace him by giving more hours to French and history.
Personally, I would have preferred this solution.
Instead, it will replace it with a course in Quebec culture and citizenship.
It remains to be seen what he will put behind these words, as one can expect the pro-ECR lobby to seek to recycle its old junk into this new format. The government will have to be vigilant and ensure that pseudo-experts do not come to hinder its decision.
But let's take François Legault's proposal seriously: will the government dare to define Quebec culture through its history, its memory, its traditions, its classics, its literature, its songs?
Will he dare to make it a real instrument of national cohesion, to transmit to all the references that
we should never have ceased to have in common?
Because in the face of the Americanization of mentalities and Netflix culture, our identity must resist and be transmitted.
For immigrant populations, first or second generation, who are slow to familiarize themselves with our nation, where they have freely decided to settle, this course will be very useful.
Another question: how will the government define citizenship?
Culture
Because it will not escape anyone that Quebec, for the moment, except in a completely metaphorical way, has no citizenship. It does not have the status or privileges of a sovereign state.
So what will this course cover? Learning about our political system? Very well.
Will he also teach students that Quebec is not a signatory to the Constitution, that the government of judges causes real democratic problems, and that it is not enough for a lobby to claim to speak on behalf of a minority for it to be immediately recognized as "rights"?
I repeat: this course should not become a BIS RCT.
