It is your right to like or unlike whoever you feel. Just as it is your right to write all about it after the fact. With no offense to you or your opinions intended, however, this is the kind of statement that reinforces preconceived notions of the other and gets amplified by people whose agenda it plays to. And all sides, in all arenas (not just Quebec politics), are guilty of this. I am therefore motivated to register my disagreement with what you have to say.

I thank you for not censoring these comments.

In all seriousness though…

I’m half francophone and many of my relatives are Quebec nationalists. It’s not necessarily an opinion I agree with but I’ve learned plenty from listening to them and keeping an open mind.
Being half English at French school, my brother and I were teased and bullied. But you know what, we took our lumps, we grew up and we’re okay now. We don’t gain anything by breaking off contact with those who disagree with us. That’s a basic tenant of free speech (maybe they don’t have copies of JS Mill’s “On Liberty” kicking around at the Peel Pub but you should pick one up some time).

Also, when you say you bleed for Canada do you mean you’ve served in the military? If so, then thanks for serving our country. If not, don’t say you bleed for the country. If you bleed for the country, enlist or maybe visit a veteran’s hospital and try telling someone who lost their legs in an I.E.D. explosion that you “bleed” for Canada. I’m sure he’ll appreciate your sacrifice.

I respect you right to say what you want and to courageously “unfriend” your throngs of evil PQ fans but Jesus Christ don’t insinuate that you represent frustrated English speakers.

The PQ may have a great number of policies I disagree with and some policies that restrict individual rights in a way that makes me uncomfortable. But two wrongs don’t make a right and that’s a lesson we should always teach our children.

Now to state my own opinon, I feel the general consensus from myself and my friends is that these people do not represent ALL my viewpoints. I am part of the 99% but I don’t have to agree fully with their agenda. Many of these protesters are not fully informed on how business functions in our society, so they sound faily uneducted when they propose taxing the rich at a high percentage. Currently, there are different tax brackets so the rich are paying more, and I very well know that raising it even more in this country where taxes are high in general, will encourage more people to go black market and more deals under the table. But also, why should I have to rely on someone making more money to pay more taxes to subsidize the same services I use for paying less? Is that fair as well? So, there are 2 sides to the coin, most of which, the protesters fail to recognize or acknowledge.

If the government hadn’t issued the bailouts, I don’t think people understand exactly where the markets would be right now or the economy for that matter. If the banks/insurance cos/other companies didn’t recieve T.A.R.P and other packages, the markets would still be crushed and hundreds of thousands of jobs would not have been saved. The bottom line is there was no easy fix for the mess, bailouts had to be done and we need to move on with our lives. This ‘occupy’ movement needs to come up with better ideas other than taxing the rich via higher taxes or more fees for speculative investments and complaining about corporate greed. They are too focused on their unambitious business oriented ideas instead of constructive and objective points that will actually work.