Jan Wong controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.

A shooting at Dawson College occurred in Montreal, Quebec on September 13, 2006, resulting in two deaths (a student, Anastasia Rebecca de Sousa, and the perpetrator, Kimveer Gill) and many injured. Only three days later, the national newspaper The Globe and Mail, called Canada's newspaper of record, published on its front page^[1] Jan Wong's "Get under the desk" article.^[2] In it, all three school shooting tragedies of the last decades in Quebec, those of the École Polytechnique (14 deaths), Concordia University (4 deaths) and Dawson College (2 deaths, as noted), were linked with the purported alienation brought upon by "the decades-long linguistic struggle". Public outcry and political condemnation soon followed.

Contents 1 Article 2 Public reaction 3 Political reaction 4 Globe and Mail response 5 See also 6 References

[edit] Article

The author implied in the article that the murderous actions of the three perpretrators were somehow related to the fact that they were not old-stock French Quebecers (Marc Lépine, half-Arab, Valery Fabrikant, born Russian and Kimveer Gill, of Indian heritage, respectively) and therefore alienated by a Quebec society concerned with "racial purity". Citing the deprecated^[3][4] term "pure laine" as if it were a contemporary fashion of seeing races in Quebec, it painted Quebec as unique in the world for racism: "Elsewhere, to talk of racial 'purity' is repugnant. Not in Quebec."

The article displayed factually wrong statements. It claimed Montreal to be a "once-cosmopolitan city" while the metropolis is at a high level of diversity relative to its history (in the 2001 Census, it was said to be composed of 69% French speakers, 12% English speakers and 19% native speakers of other languages). It portrayed school shootings in Canada as a Quebec phenomenon, citing Jan Bryan, columnist for the Montreal Gazette, saying "Three doesn’t mean anything. But three out of three in Quebec means something." However, five Canadian shootings out of eight have actually occurred outside Quebec, according to Bryan's own newspaper^[5] and criminality in Montreal is among the lowest in North American cities.

The article claimed the Montreal English community to be a small-town community where everyone knows everyone, while the community is composed of over 400,000 individuals, controlling five CÉGEPs, two universities and a vast number of health, media and various other organizations. Also, linguistic factors were never claimed by the assassins. Lépine had a grudge against women and feminists, Fabrikant against rival scholars and Gill, a bullied child, targeted students and said in his notorious internet blog that Quebec was a "good place to live in".^[4] Furthermore, it is dubious to consider Lépine as not a part of francophone Quebecois society, he being estranged from his Algerian-born father and raised mainly by his Quebecoise mother, whose name he adopted (he was born Gamil Gharbi). Both Fabrikant and Gill targeted anglophones, not francophones.

[edit] Public reaction

Hundreds of letters of complaints were received by The Globe and Mail.^[6] Like in Barbara Kay's case, the Saint-Jean-Baptiste Society (SSJB) lodged a complaint to the Quebec Press Council. SSJB president Jean Dorion declared "There is no obsession for racial purity in Quebec, definitely not. [...] The expression 'pure laine' is absolutely obsolete."^[3] The "blogosphere" soon saw a flood of posts against Wong's allegations.^[7] Researcher Micheline Labelle, director of the Centre de recherche sur l’immigration, l’ethnicité et la citoyenneté (CRIEC, "center of research on immigration, ethnicity and citizenship") at the Université du Québec à Montréal stated that she saw in the arguments something akin to "neoracism", that is to say a generalization of a cultural trait applied to a given population. "For less than that, minorities go to the courts", she said.^[4]

A vast number of Quebec journalists denounced Jan Wong's article. French-born journalist Michel Vastel, in his blog for the news magazine L'actualité, called the article "deceitful racism" and the interpretation "repugnant".^[1] His opposition was advanced again in a following Journal de Québec piece by Vastel.^[8] The article was condemned by federalist La Presse editorialist André Pratte (in an letter to the Globe^[9] and a La Presse editorial),^[10] journalists Michel C. Auger^[11] of Le Journal de Montréal, Michel David^[12] and Michel Venne^[13] (sovereigntist) of Le Devoir, Alain Dubuc^[14] (federalist), Vincent Marissal,^[15] Yves Boisvert^[16] and Stéphane Laporte^[17] of La Presse, Josée Legault^[18] (sovereigntist) of The Gazette, Jean-Jacques Samson^[19] of Le Soleil, sovereigntist militant and author Patrick Bourgeois^[20] of Le Québécois, Gérald Leblanc,^[21] retired journalist of La Presse and Joseph Facal,^[22] Journal de Montréal columnist and former Parti Québécois minister.

Montreal's English-language newspaper The Gazette called it "nonsense" in an editorial.^[23] It however found the reaction to be out of proportion, as did Lysiane Gagnon from La Presse, who nonetheless called the theory "delirious".^[24] Gazette journalist Don Macpherson wrote: "By the standards of Wong’s article, one could just as easily blame the [three] shootings on federalism, since all three happened to occur while the Quebec Liberals were in power". He advanced that, on the contrary, the tragedy and the controversy around Wong's article had shown a remarkable unity between French and English-speaking Quebecers.^[25] Barbara Kay, author of the "Quebecistan" controversy, herself criticized Wong, calling the analysis "bullshit".^[4] Jack Jedwab, Executive Director of the Association for Canadian Studies in Montreal and former Executive Director of the Quebec Region of the Canadian Jewish Congress, noted that the expression "pure laine" was "no longer quite common". He also called the analysis "nonsense".^[4] The Globe and Mail remarked that "[i]n English Canada, unsurprisingly, the response has been considerably more muted".^[6] However, on September 28, 2006, Warren Kinsella wrote a harsh criticism of Wong's work in The National Post.^[26] Kinsella was born in Montreal, Quebec.

[edit] Political reaction

On September 19, 2006, the Canadian Press reported that federalist Premier of Quebec Jean Charest, demanded an apology, calling the article a "disgrace". He sent an open letter^[27] to the Globe vigorously defending the Quebec society and its language protection.

In this kind of situation, anyone who ventures to put forward explanations or comparisons at the very least risks making a fool of himself. Jan Wong has certainly discredited herself with her gamble. I was shocked and disappointed by the narrow-minded analysis published in the Saturday, September 16 edition, in which Ms Wong sought to identify the affirmation of French culture in Québec as the deeper cause of the Dawson College shootings and the killings at the Polytechnique in 1989. Quebecers make up less than 3% of the North American population. Over the centuries, through the vicissitudes of history, we have managed to preserve our language and culture, and in so doing, cherished the highest democratic ideals. Every year, we welcome tens of thousands of individuals from the four corners of the earth, people who contribute to building a free society in Québec, a society that is proud of its difference. [...] Ms Wong’s article is a disgrace. It betrays an ignorance of Canadian values and a profound misunderstanding of Québec. She should have the decency to apologize to all Quebecers.

It was then Conservative Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper's turn to lambaste the article, calling the argument "prejudiced", "absurd", "irresponsible" and "without foundation".^[28] He sent the Globe a similar letter. "These actions (the killings) deserve our unqualified moral condemnation, not an excuse for printing prejudices masked in the language of social theory," Harper wrote.^[29] Parti Québécois leader André Boisclair declared that the journalist had, on the intellectual level, "slipped into the dregs" ("glissé dans les bas fonds").^[30] Former Premier of Quebec Bernard Landry declared to La Tribune "if she is of good faith, she will have to apologize [...] It is incredible that it is still possible today of conveying so delirious opinions on Quebec. Especially at an era when Quebec is more cosmopolitan than ever. [...] It is insulting for Quebec and dishonouring for Canada. In the same way as if I saw a similar article about Ontario in La Tribune, I would be ashamed for La Tribune."^[31]

Cameroon-born Bloc Québécois Member of Parliament and pro-independence militant Maka Kotto issued a declaration at the Canadian House of Commons stating "to pretend that there could be a link of any kind of cause-and-effect between the dramatic episode of Dawson College and Bill 101 — described as infamous by the journalist — pertains of a defamatory delirium disconnected from the Quebec reality. [...] Quebec is an inclusive, welcoming society where it is pleasant to live. As an immigrant, I felt very rapidly welcome there and I deplore that the openness of the Quebec people can be put into question." He invited the federal government to denounce the writings of Jan Wong as well.^[32] On September 20 the House of Commons unanimously passed a motion requesting an apology "to the Quebec people" for the column.^[33] Denis Coderre, the Liberal MP who tabled the motion, called the column "classless".^[34] "People feel there's a sort [...] of trend.", he said. "I think that it's enough. We're not "Quebecistan", we're not a people that ostracizes, we're a model of integration."^[35] Coderre was in the group of politicians attacked by Barbara Kay in the "Quebecistan" controversy, also accused of "Quebec bashing". Marie-Hélène Paradis, press attaché of Quebec Minister of Immigration Lise Thériault, said "No data can support what Ms. Wong advances." She declared that such allegations feed "the type of fast judgements that lead to discrimination."^[4]

Despite having voted for the motion, Conservative Member of Parliament Daniel Petit declared that there might be a link, as Wong suggested. "I think that the billion (dollars) that we put in the registery (the Canadian gun registry) should have been put into education and integration of immigrants in Montreal", Petit said. Dimitri Soudas, press attaché for Conservative Prime Minister Harper, said "The comments of Mr. Petit are unacceptable, he should retract them and it does not reflect in any case the position of the government", adding that Petit was met by the Prime Minister's cabinet on the subject. MPs of the House of Commons criticized him for his statements, including Michel Gauthier, of the Bloc Québécois, and Denis Coderre, of the Liberal Party of Canada, who demanded apologies. He offered them promptly. "I made inappropriate remarks," Petit said in a statement. "I withdraw them entirely because you cannot draw any link between the integration of immigrants in Quebec and the terrible tragedy at Dawson College."^[36][37]

[edit] Globe and Mail response

On September 21, 2006, The Globe and Mail published an editorial on the affair. Calling the controversy a "small uproar", it defended the right of the journalist to question such phenomena, the "need to ask hard questions and explore uncomfortable avenues", saying that it "merely wondered". The editor claimed not to be surprised by the hundreds of letters of protest received, including those of First Ministers Charest and Harper. The editorial validated Wong's heavily disputed claims of alienation in Quebec, which the Globe called "politics of exclusion". Asking whether this so-called exclusion led to marginalization and perhaps alienation, it said that the answer is "arguable". However, it called the marginalization and alienation of the three shooters "obvious". About whether it could be associated with the murders, it answered that "[n]o such evidence exists".^[6] In a sentence apparently intended to balance the assertions, it implied at the same time that an even worse discrimination existed in the Quebec of the past, as it wrote: "By the same token, it would be remiss to forget that today’s Quebec is not the Quebec of yesteryear."^[6] The Globe and Mail did not issue an apology for Jan Wong's piece, as requested by many, including the unanimous House of Commons.

Leader of the Bloc Québécois Gilles Duceppe declared that he considered the editorial an attempt at justification.^[37] "It even suggests there might be some problems in Quebec because of the language laws. It's unacceptable and it's deplorable and it's shameful for a newspaper of that stature", he said. "Try imagining the opposite — If I'd made such nonsensical, absurd remarks (about English Canada). Then all the editorial writers across Canada would get involved."^[34] Premier of Quebec Jean Charest was said to be disappointed by the Globe and Mail response. He was also said to be offended by the little consideration the paper gave his open letter, that was published in the readers' opinion page (like the one from Prime Minister Harper). "The (House of Commons) motion is totally ignored", said the Premier's press attaché.^[38] On September 23, 2006, the Canadian Press reported that Edward Greenspon, editor of The Globe and Mail, expressed regrets. In a Globe and Mail column, without making formal apologies, he wrote that the personal opinions of Wong should have been excised from the piece, not because they were unacceptable, but because they constituted a "thesis", not a "statement of fact". He wrote that "they should have been put into a separate piece clearly marked opinion". He however believed the reaction to be clearly disproportionate.^[39]

Jan Wong declined the invitation of host Guy A. Lepage to explain herself at the popular Quebecois talk show Tout le monde en parle.^[30] She has declared: "I brought forward a point of view [...] and I maintain it." ^[40] She has claimed that, during the controversy, she was the target of sexist and racist attacks, citing a Le Devoir cartoon that showed her opening a fortune cookie that said "Beware of Bill 101". The newspaper explained that it was a reference to the Chinese restaurants of her well-known father, Bill Wong, not her ethnicity.

[edit] See also

• Quebec bashing

[edit] References