Québécois de souche isn’t a racist term
The problem is not the reference to ancestry, it’s that some use it to create divisions
Je suis un Québécois de souche J’ai une fleur de lys tatouée sa bouche C’est pas que j’sais pas ben parler Mais chu un colon anglicisé
Un colon anglicisé
An englished colon ...Cha Cha Cha!
— Les Cowboys fringants
Last week, ex-Montrealer, now Toronto-based commentator Supriya Dwivedi, tweeted that Québécois de souche, a term she had to explain to anglos on a panel, “is loaded and yes, racist.” I wish I had been there.
I like Supriya, we shared airtime on CJAD in the past, but she’s wrong.
Time to clarify its meaning, as well as “pure laine” and “French-Canadian,” while we’re at it. Always happy to fill in the blanks.
Here is an analogy. Some 20 years ago, I converted to Judaism. I even wrote a book about it, Pourquoi moi? Ma vie chez les juifs hassidiques, a bestseller, even!
No matter how many mitzvot I perform, I cannot claim Jewish ancestry. I cannot play Jewish Geography, a family-and-communitythemed Jewish six degrees of separation. When I was fully observant, I was often reminded that I wasn’t “FFB,” or “frum from birth,” born observant.
Was that “racist”? Should I have complained to the Human Rights Commission? Written an op-ed on my exclusion? No. People and things are what they are.
Québécois de souche is a description, not an achievement. It points to someone whose forefathers came from France to Nouvelle-France as colonizers between 1534 and 1763. Colonialism does not have the same cachet today as it enjoyed at the time, but a small group of courageous men and women, be it for the grace of God or for the good of Mammon, risked all to open up a continent and settle mainly in Acadia and the Saint Lawrence valley.
And multiply, building a French-speaking home in the New World.
The Seven Years’ War, which had nothing to do with them, was fought mostly in Europe (and India) between the French and the English armies, among others. The French king lost and surrendered his North American possessions, but his former subjects survived.
Yes, some Québécois use “de souche” to create division. The despicable Fédération des Québécois de souche must be denounced for appropriating and defiling what is a quaint but neutral saying. Interestingly, these days, they are also involved in anti-feminist activities, denouncing a non-existent “genocide” of white farmers in South Africa and raising money for the defence of Atalante Québec members who invaded the offices of VICE Québec.
Proving once more that the extreme right will grab whatever it can to advance the cause of intolerance, including legitimate pride in one’s origins.
Now, what about “pure laine”? It has become a bit of a joke among francophones. It is problematic and we know it, but it can easily be made toothless. If I poke fun at someone for being a douche de souche, I might call that person “pure Phentex,” a much-derided synthetic yarn invented in St-Hyacinthe, used to knit indestructible slippers, often in brown and orange, known as gougounes en Phentex. Not nice.
Now, French Canadian. As much as I miss that “label of origin” because that’s what my ancestors called themselves and because it includes all francophones living in Canada, it also refers to ethnicity, something only transmissible though bloodlines. Québécois is inclusive. French Canadian, not.
“Yes, but neither is Québécois de souche,” I hear you say. Perhaps, but de souche offers loving flexibility. Trees can be planted, replanted, nurtured and thrive. An oak is an oak is an oak.
Which is why I have decided to say Québécois de vieille souche (old roots) and Québécois de nouvelle souche (new roots) for the sake of clarity and inclusiveness. The important thing to remember is that we’re all rooted in the same earth.