Bozo Lévesque, the sheepish follower

From uni.ca ...

We witnessed last week the results of the one-track mentality prevalent in large segments of Quebec's society, while we were able in addition to observe a demonstration of collective hypocrisy. Mr. Raymond Lévesque, a Quebec chansonnier best known for a song entitled "Bozo les culottes", decided to refuse a Governor General prize and forego the $15 000 reward which was associated with it.

Through this gesture, Mr. Lévesque chose to endear himself in the eyes of sovereigntists, even though three weeks before he seemed genuinely touched when he learned he had been nominated as a recipient of the Governor General's Performing Arts Award. More importantly and interestingly however are the reasons given by Mr. Lévesque to justify his refusal. Having read his rationale, I do not know any more whether I should continue admiring the man who once stood up for his convictions, or condemn him for contributing to a systematic misinformation campaign in his home province. Mr. Lévesque, sheepishly following the one-track mindset afflicting so many Quebec nationalists, declared that he could not accept an award given by a Canadian military Commander, because "Canada had sent its army into Quebec in 1970 and imprisoned more than 450 of our compatriots without reason, without laying any charges, and then without making any excuses for it. "

Doesn't Mr. Lévesque know that the Premier of Quebec Robert Bourassa in fact ordered the army's intervention, acting in conformity with of the National Defense Act? Doesn't he know that shortly after this intervention, which was orchestrated by Quebec City and not by Canada, as he claims, the Premier of Quebec in conjunction with the Mayor of Montreal, Jean Drapeau, asked the federal government to invoke the War Measures Act to quell an "apprehended insurrection", thus suspending civil liberties? It is true that, at the time, the heavy-handed municipal police force and the Sureté du Québec arrested 450 citizens, but on what basis can he link a bungled police operation with the Office of the Governor General of Canada? The army was called in by virtue of the National Defense Act, and later civil liberties were suspended by virtue of the War Measures Act. In both cases, the shots were called not by Canada as claimed by our dear artist, but by the government of Quebec. As well, Mr. Lévesque conveniently ignores the fact that among those dear 450 "fellow countrymen" arrested by the police during the October crisis, a minister of Pierre Trudeau's cabinet found himself the victim of police error. Mr. Lévesque asserts that there no excuses were made. Does he not know that the government of Quebec indemnified approximately half the citizens who filed a complaint following their arrest? Nothing is more despicable than deforming the truth in order to justify a partisan position.

Fully displaying his misguided rigidity, our artist then attempted to justify his refusal by attacking Michaëlle Jean at a more personal level. Mr. Lévesque asserts that Madame Jean "denies the concept of two nations in Canada". Did Mrs. Jean really deny the concept of two nations? Mrs. Jean in fact candidly declared that the era of the two solitudes was in the past. How could our artist interpret this as meaning that the Governor General is repudiating the two nation's concept? And are there really two solitudes in Canada? or is it a view that is being forced upon us by those who in the end benefit from the acceptance of the two solitudes idea?

Is Canada only composed of two nations? Absolutely not. The two nation's concept for Canada is simply a fraud. It is preposterous to consider the rest of Canada as a single entity or a single nation, versus a Quebecois nation. If Quebec forms a nation, what are we to say of the oft-neglected Acadian nation, which nevertheless corresponds to an integral component of the Canadian ensemble? In addition, what would we say to members of the First Nations?

Furthermore, it is a near insult for Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders to insist that there are only two nations in Canada. Newfoundland was the first territory to become independent from the British Crown and the only province to have been a country before 1949. How can anyone then consider our federal state as homogeneous, when Canada is so diverse sociologically and politically, when our union now comprises numerous ethno-cultural communities with their own population centers and their own governments? How can anyone place in the pot the Inuits of Nunavut, the residents of Nova Scotia, the French Acadians, members of the former state of Newfoundland, the Metis of Manitoba, the First Nations of Canada, finally adding Anglo-Saxons, and argue that they form one single Canadian nation, while Quebeckers form the second?

Today, as we witness the growth of a nationalist movement in the West and specifically in Alberta, it has become absurd to describe Canada as an homogeneous entity dealing with Quebec. Not only is it absurd, it is a deceptive intellectual manipulation designed to present as truth the very solitude nationalists profess to abhor. The real proponents of the two-solitude concept are the current architects of Quebec's collective mode of thinking. When will they stop being the sheepish bearers of disinformation? I see within my society a hereditary tendency, a unidirectional and collective mindset, which no one can challenge without risking being accused of treason or branded as "uncle Tom". Raymond Lévesque's behavior provides a glimpse into the effect of this mentality, which drives nationalist thinkers to sheepishly misinterpret and distort facts and information. Sheeps tend to stay with the rest of their herd, follow it blindly without asking questions, too afraid of being left out by their peers. By refusing this award, Mr. Lévesque, you are not, as you claim, being faithful "to Quebec, its people, its laws and its future". On the contrary, you are faithful to the old partisan and collective mentality in Quebec, just like the good sheep that have become.