Getting your medication for an STD in English.

I’m afraid I’m not a libertarian.

“mass immigration”

What do you propose in its stead? I’m for a program that attracts hardworking educated and reasonably intelligent people to this country, without much regard to numbers, and no regard to color, national origin, etc.

On that, maybe I am a bit of a libertarian.

“anti-additional funding for bilingualism”
I’m against additional federal funding for this. I’m for additional provincial or municipal funding for this if it’s what a majority of citizens in the relevant jurisdiction want.

Again, I’m more of a democrat than a libertarian.

“pro-Canadian Forces”
We are blessed as a country to have people who serve with bravery and honor.

I am not convinced that the senior leadership of the Canadian Forces has been of the best quality over the last 20 years.

Does that make me anti-Canadian Forces?

I am not convinced that I want to write a blank cheque for the Forces, though I am definitely convinced they do need more funding.

I am staggered by the commitment and integrity of most of those who serve.

I know I’m coming late to this discussion; sorry. But I can’t help but feel some of what you list above is overly simplistic.

-Holmwood

In some ways they could be the most reactionary of groups, sometimes so much so that they reminded me of the old joke about the paleo-con who was such a political dinosaur that, if he had been around at the Creation, he would have voted for chaos.

I suspect that the bulk of the aboriginal community would oppose “enforced” integration but I am not so sure that that same “bulk” would not be delighted to see the back of the Department of Indian Affairs.

That said, there are far more efficient ways of delivering bilingual services in areas where one or the other language is predominant than making bilingualism a criteria for any significant advancement in the federal civil service. However, I suspect this will be a self correcting problem simply because the need for middle and senior level federal civil servants will soon outstrip the number of remotely bilingual candidates. As, unfortunately, the civil service is unlikely to shrink, the alternative will be to designate an increasing number of positions as dual use - bilingual by preference but unilingual in a pinch.

Peter - I actually don’t care very much about bilingualism: like most government programs, I suspect it is a waste of time, and like most federal programs I suspect it is designed to take my money and use it to please (or at least, placate) Quebecers. I’m used to it - that’s just the way federalism works in this country, so I tolerate it as a relatively cheap feel-good program.

I was just responding to the ‘oh-aren’t-the-Euros-wonderful’ tone of your prior post. Sure, it isn’t hard to learn another language if you are motivated to do so - the fact that so few Canadians do, even in the face of the support of the chattering and political classes, would indicate that the level of intrinsic motivation is pretty low.

There is another element to this debate which also affects issues like aboriginal self-government, gay marriage etc. I think there is a qualitative political and even perhaps philosophical difference between opposing the introduction of something and calling for the undoing of that already done, especially if a minority gives it unanimous support and great symbolic weight to who they are and where they fit in. I can’t see much progress on the aboriginal front over forty years and there is a lot of dissent and calls for reform out there , but I am also aware that about 99.9999% of the aboriginal community would oppose enforced integration with some ugly results if it were tried. You’ll find plenty of Quebecers who think the West should be left alone on bilingualism, but not one for making English the sole official language for the Feds. Unless fissure and separation is the goal, there is a pretty good argument for pragmatism over theory, no? When your support level on the other side is not just a minority, but zero, it is worth proceeding, well, conservatively.

I’m a taxpayer, Peter - that gives me (and you) a legitimate interest in everything the government does.

Hundreds, thousands… what’s an order of magnitude between friends?

As Jay pointed out, if “suck up the consequences with no more whining” just means “no cushy job with the feds” (and pace Kevin, subtitles) I can live with that. If “we hire the best” (out of a restricted candidate pool that may not include the “best and brightest”) means that the federal government becomes (even more) incompetent (and if they hire from Quebec, corrupt) - well, I can live with an ever-growing argument to limit federal taxing and spending power.

But one is reminded of the South African situation when the Afrikaners found themselves becoming a double minority to first the Blacks and secondly the English speakers. To preserve their place they made their civil service bilingual: Afrikaans and English. So, essentially, the only utility Afrikaans had was as either a mother tongue or a credential for the South African civil service. The English stayed away in droves.

I doubt French will become quite so embattled in Canada; but if the best argument you can make for learning it is that without it you cannot rise in the federal civil service you have pretty much put paid to French as anything but an obscure piece of credentialism. Rather like Latin and Greek for colonial administrators in 19th century England.

(And given the wave of retirements which is hitting the federal and provincial civil services it is not at all clear that this Trudeaupian obscurantism will survive much past the retirement of the last boomer.)