[Marcarc]

If you get down to it, there's really no reason to deride such people. It makes perfect sense. Why get involved in institutions that will only shut you out at every opportunity. Again, I have to say, if you aren't running for office I highly doubt people will listen-why would they? If you say things they agree with then they might agree with you, but ACT with you is a different story. We really aren't 'doing' anything here, we're just talking, again, there's nothing wrong with that, but for many 'talk is cheap'. It makes perfect sense not to 'talk politics' because everyone knows our opinions have very little bearing, even in a minority government.<br /> <br /> There's really no point in trying to 'get to' these people you discuss because what then? You'll get people all riled up and then they'll say "OK, what now?" and you'll say...."Now we write letters to the editor!" Now there's something to get excited about! Again, in you want to make a difference, join one of the organizations making a difference.

[Calumny]

In terms of apathy, you're going to have two types of people.<br /> <br /> One will be a person who is concerned and would like to do something however, doesn't see any reason to do so as in their view nothing they do can change anything anyway.<br /> <br /> The other will be the person who just isn't interested in whatever is an issue to you because they don't have a problem with the status quo or see more to lose in changing it than there is to gain or in fact benefit from no change.<br /> <br /> If the latter is greater than the former, whatever issue you're concerned with probably isn't going anywhere. <br /> <br /> If the former is greater than the latter, they need focus. They already know there is an issue, so what they need is some unifying vision that they can buy into and see both a chance of success from their involvement and some benefit to them.<br /> <br /> The Quebec sovereignty movement clearly demonstrates the above. <br /> <br /> It also demonstrates that significant change doesn't occur overnight. <br /> <br /> [QUOTE]I also pointed out that too many people have given up and are waking up to some real nightmares(i.e. Bush, sponsorship scam, etc...).[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> I'm a bit hesitant to say people have given up. What has happened is that many have given up on the current system and no realistic alternative has been offered.<br /> <br /> In all fairness, we've been brainwashed throughout our lives that this system, both political and economic, is the 'best' or only 'realistic' system and it will take significant time and effort to break through that conditioning. God knows, there's been a whole lot of people much brighter than ourselves who've been trying to get this point across for years without success.<br /> <br /> [QUOTE]We really aren't 'doing' anything here, we're just talking, again, there's nothing wrong with that, but for many 'talk is cheap'[/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> We could be doing more here, most choose not to do so. Basically, the only purpose Vive currently serves is to give wackos like us a chance to yap off about our various opinions whenever we have nothing better to do with our time, or want to avoid doing the laundry, etc.<br /> <br /> Admittedly, an on-line site can't replace real world activism however, it could serve as a tool to support the same. <br /> <br />

[gaulois]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] <br /> There's really no point in trying to 'get to' these people you discuss because what then? You'll get people all riled up and then they'll say "OK, what now?" and you'll say...."Now we write letters to the editor!" Now there's something to get excited about! Again, in you want to make a difference, join one of the organizations making a difference. [/QUOTE]<br /> <br /> As far as I know, there is no organization for FHQs focused on changing the current system (its media, its democratic instances, etc...). The existing francophone organizations are conditionned to apply for grants and act mainly as lobby groups to the bureaucrats of La Francophonie residing in Ottawa. The subsidized medias support and promote this framework.<br /> <br /> So my aim as an "activist" is to regroup a number of people that are prepared to push through media and democratic reforms that will allow FHQs to gain more self-reliance. We have basically been under "third-party" management forever and the results are not pretty IMHO. <br /> <br /> I am most thankful to Vive for being the only media that has ever covered this issue amongst Canadians and Québécois. A number of Vive members have also actively encouraged me on doing something about this. That is huge. Le Canard Réincarné is a new media entirely focused on this issue. It represents the first step in what could be a very long journey. My upcoming Vive/DDC article is about the roadmap for deploying DD within FHQs. I am still working on its translation. It is already published on Le Canard under:<br /> <a href="http://lecanardreincarne.freesoul.ca/content.php?article.25">Une Démocratie Directe de Franco-Colombiens: l'Utopie après celle de la communauté en ligne?</a><br /> <br /> Marcarc: Perhaps I misunderstood your response? Calumny had an excellent summary in a different post on the two different types of apathy I have to deal with. The interest for the majority here is that what a minority experiences in terms of bringing about changes is far more pronounced in the minority. It is yet an other microcosm of the majority. If you can bring about changes in the minority, perhaps you can bring about similar changes in the majority. Is this not the Quebec (&First Nations) lesson on gaining their sovereingty?

[Calumny]

Not to get off the topic, and forget this post if it's in the article, however, what exactly is your 'vision' in terms of the FHQ and what exactly in needed within our nation to support the achievement and on-going viability of this vision?

[Marcarc]

I must admit that I'm also a little lost with respect to the FHQ simply because it's not my community. I don't know the 'effects' you refer to or know what these groups want. My emphasis has been direct democracy, which is empowering the 'majority'. Empowering minorities is something else, where you are fighting 'oppression' or something, or a different 'type' of oppression. Here in Waterloo we have literally hundreds of 'minority groups', and I really don't know how to 'empower' each or in what way to go about it. There are thousands of chinese here, they become assimilated, although they 'form' groups in communities-restaurants, study groups, parties, etc. They talk chinese and that keeps their culture alive.<br /> <br /> For french communities I think we go back to the direct democracy idea of empowering municipalities. This requires a far different kind of federalism, which is a long, hard sell. In New Brunswick you have many acadian communities, they 'make it work' by staying close to home, limiting material wants, etc. Empowering them is something Robichaud did, strangely enough, by centralizing administration in Fredericton. The point isn't so much centralization, I think the real problem is simply this-the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Robichaud made it possible by 'sharing the wealth' of english NB'ers with poorer NB'ers who happened to be french.<br /> <br /> In Sudbury Ontario you also have a strong french population and Ontario has a pretty strong french school tradition. There are no real government 'aid's to keeping french alive, just the fact that so many people speak it. That above obviously shows my ignorance of the issue, and I must confess that as a 'wasp' I simply don't know how to address french or native concerns except to get control of the government and 'stop doing bad things'. I am convinced that many of our current problems would be solved just by opening up government and REALLY making it transparent. <br /> <br />

[gaulois]

[QUOTE BY= Marcarc] I am convinced that many of our current problems would be solved just by opening up government and REALLY making it transparent. <br /> [/QUOTE]<br /> I am in full agreement. In regards to Calumny's post, yes the next article captures what is needed. In summary, the case of FHQs is strangely similar to the case of First Nations "third party management". The franco communities that used to be self-reliant have become overly dependant on the feds and their bureaucrats. The communities are fractured in the group that works within the fed "system" and the other one that works outside the fed system and ends up dropping out (aka assimilating) cause the fed system does not respond to their needs. It is almost like if the system was designed for exactly that purpose! A level of autonomy *within* the FHQs (with no dependency whatsoever on Ottawa) would allow them to take ownership of their issues, administer own budget, and they would not suffer from this internal division. Solution is somewhat similar to the First Nation and the federal government needs to step back. Their bureaucrats have failed.