GWAR brainlessness

GWAR, like many warmongers, must watch Fox. Where else could one get the idea that John Kerry is "attacking Dick Cheney's gay daughter" [Cover, "Democracy in traction," Oct. 28], when Kerry suggests that she is a reasonable person, "being who she was born to be".

Funny kind of "attack," that one. More politicians should attack gays this way. Wouldn't it be more to the point (and more in character) for GWAR to praise Kerry for "defending" all of those poor fuckers to death in Vietnam?

Playing dumb is an essential part of the ironic fun of GWAR, but real brainlessness blunts the fun, along with serious and relevant points.

» Aaron Ricker Parks

English privilege

This is in response to Russell Wyse's accusation that my comment about the "typical anglo lack of curiosity towards French culture" is ignorant and historically dated ["Anglos belong," Letters, Oct. 28].

Firstly, I would recommend that Mr. Wyse read the first of the two articles I was referring to ["Quebecers unite," Oct. 7], in which one anglo talks about the anglo ghetto's close-mindedness toward French.

Secondly, I would like to say that there is still a large percentage of anglo Montrealers who live all their life in Montreal, yet can't speak French. I personally know several people in their 20s and 30s who live as if they're in the U.S. or English Canada. Culturally, everything they consume comes from abroad. I've been to video stores on the west side of town and found Robert Lepage and Denis Arcand films in the foreign section, so I don't know about bilingualism having made "great inroads."

Now, let's not get into a sterile "chicken vs. the egg" debate about who was here first or who is bigger. I want to write about the present, and where I was getting at in my response to Tammy Dunlop's Oct. 14 letter ["Anglo Integration"] and her "Quebec's lack of decent jobs for anglos" comment. Quebec anglos never like to compare situations with francophones in the rest of Canada because they know it makes them look spoiled. So they try to downplay the similarities, or hide behind the States for their ignorance of French.

In reality, English Canadians don't want equality, they want privileges. Because if they wanted equal treatment with francophones, you wouldn't have Ms Dunlop's "lack of decent jobs" comment, or anglophones suing the federal government because learning French to work in Ottawa (as francophones have to do with English) is supposedly discrimination or "unfair treatment."

That's being spoiled. That is a manifestation of the very Canadian double standard and that is what bothers me. And that is why bilingualism is absurdly applied more rigorously in Quebec than in any other province (even though bilingualism is Canada's concept, and that Quebec is supposedly the least multicultural, least open-minded and most racist province according to English Canadian newspapers). I just cannot comprehend the banal tone in which anglos with views similar to Ms. Dunlop can encourage languages to die in Canada and around the world (with notions like, "Well get used to it, English is an international language."). Who thinks there are any decent French jobs in English Canada? There aren't even any decent French jobs left in Montreal. So if the only French majority area left in Canada is too French, there are plenty of choices elsewhere for anglos.

May all the people of Earth speak on an equal level in Esperanto, the only true international language!

» Simon Leclerc

Good and bad poor

The trouble with changing welfare policy isn't as straightforward as OPDS co-ordinator Étienne Legault would have us believe ["Welfare reform protested," Oct. 21].

It's true that workfare amounts to a corruption of welfare. Let's be clear: we either are working - and getting legitimately paid - or we're on public assistance while between jobs. So the concept of "mandatory community work" doesn't make sense; if it is work, the pay should be commensurate. How can anyone pretend that access to welfare is conditional on the fact that you're working for it, when it was precisely designed as compensation for those out of work?

Indeed, but that doesn't mean unemployment is permanent, or that persons on welfare bear no responsibility for it. If the rich can be both good and bad, the same can be said for the poor. It's wrong to claim "the reality right now" of hard times deserves your apathy. The reality of opportunity is unpredictable. No matter how "clearly documented" our gloomy situation is, for the law to somehow acknowledge it and therefore encourage hopelessness would only make it worse.

Whatever the state of the economy, anyone out of work and able-bodied has a constant obligation to seek employment (although extensive time off for parenting should be allowed). I can recall decades ago in Ontario when you had to prove you were looking for work or you'd be refused welfare. Without such a policy, the door would be wide open to abuse. Now, as then, the unemployed should be obliged to divulge where they applied for work, thereby responding to the government's good intentions with their own good faith.

Does the welfare system actually need any serious reform as long as work is respected as such by the authorities and those lacking it can demonstrate their integrity?

» L.S. Cattarini

WE WELCOME LETTERS TO THE EDITOR!

Send your comments, compliments or criticisms to:

Letters to the Editor,
c/o Montreal Mirror,
465 McGill, 3rd Floor
Montreal, Quebec
H2Y 4B4

You may also fax us at (514) 393-3173, or reach us by e-mail:

Letters to the Editor

All letters should include your name, address and daytime phone number.

If you wish to reach someone in particular, here's a list of people involved with the production of the newspaper and this site.