Québec solidaire - the thread

As far as foreign ownership of land goes, I believe that there is a double standard in existence. Maybe not from babblers, maybe so?

http://www.buybrazilland.com/rainforest-property-for-sale/

Ive read of Europeans buying huge tracts of the rain forest lands in Brazil for environmental reasons. 

So what if a wealthy foreigner wanted to buy thousands of hectares of farmland in Quebec and return it to natural wooded growth for environmental reasons?

I don't mind wealthy Europeans doing that AS LONG AS they allow Indigenous peoples continue to use the land traditionally. Bolsonaro has pretty much declared open season on Indigenous Brazilians.

Though obviously a landless movement would be better, and the landless farmworkers' movement is definitely high on Bolsonaro's hit list.

@cco and lagatta

Ya who knows what the right wing fascists in Brazil are going to do?  All good points made. Perhaps part of my point is related to natural environmental issues and is kind of separated from this thread

Quote:

The day Quebec has a fascist government like Bolsonaro's, abandons all pretext of environmental protection, and puts everything up for sale so foreign purchase is the only remaining conservation option, maybe that'll be worth considering.

Not sure what any of this has to do with Bolsonaro; the "buybrazilland" site has been around for four years and predates him by about three and a half.

Meanwhile, isn't singling out Chinese businesses just more "demonization of China"?

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

The day Quebec has a fascist government like Bolsonaro's, abandons all pretext of environmental protection, and puts everything up for sale so foreign purchase is the only remaining conservation option, maybe that'll be worth considering.

Not sure what any of this has to do with Bolsonaro; the "buybrazilland" site has been around for four years and predates him by about three and a half.

Meanwhile, isn't singling out Chinese businesses just more "demonization of China"?

No, it isn't. Please don't bring that silly thread into this one. 

@ swallow

The demonization of China thread is not silly in the least as you suggest. Mr Mago is correct to suggest it. Not sure if he’s sincere though?  

I did read up on some stuff here and this issue of China seeking to acquire farmland or potential farmland does have a biased demonization tone to it. 

However, having said that, I posted the foreigners purchasing land in Brazil for several reasons. And none of them about their current government (not to say that those aren’t good points)

For whatever reasons, it’s up to Quebec to determine if foreigners can own land zoned for agricultural in Quebec. 

Im not even sure what the Chinese would grow? Soybeans? Ginseng? Grain? To me, it would make more sense that a US company would be more interested in making a move into Quebec. 

What the Chinese are doing in Africa is immaterial. Neither the Chinese nor the Americans no anyone else can buy agricultural land in Quebec. Lessard-Therrien said she/we sense these predators from China in Temiskaming scoping out the land. At no point did she mention investors in general nor any threat to the law preventing them from buying land in Quebec.

There is zero threat of investors from China scoping out Temiskaming for agricultural land. It is a bogus imaginary threat and she singled out China as the country these predators are coming from. 

At the same time, QS needs to continue working on its openness to Quebec outdside the metropole, and the MNAs from Abitibi-Temiskaming and Sherbrooke -- young activist women both -- will need to be a big part of that. 

So for that reason QS should just lie and pretend it wasn't said? I'm not saying she should resign or eat dirt. I'm saying she should apologize and admit agricultural land in Quebec is not under threat and that she shouldn't have singled out the Chinese. 

If a Liberal, or CAQ, or PQ representative had said what Lessard-Therrien said QS and this board would have been all over them with accusations of racism.

If QS should be excused because it is QS, then it is no different than any other political party willing to toss ethics to the side for political expediency. 

lagatta4 wrote:

As for corporations taking control of farmland and agricultural industries, I most certainly wouldn't rule it out. Don't see how Chinese corporations would be any different from others. The problem was the unthinking use of "Chinese" rather than specifying corporations.

It did not come across as unthinking. She was clearly not referring to Canadian and Quebec corporations which would be the only actual threat as they are permitted to buy agricultural land in Temiskaming. 

Is there any threat to the Canadian law preventing foreign ownership of Canadian agricultural land? What risk is she trying to highlight here? Is there any lobbying going on? Can foreign entitities hide behind Canadian fronts? Who is it we are supposed to be wary of and why? Who are the predators she is sensing lurking about Temiskaming?

I am well aware of QS's official position and defense of immigrant rights. The Liberals are big on immigrants too. Would that be a shield if one of their MPs said what Lessard-Therrien said?

Lessard-Therrien has not said she was referring to corporations in general so why should I believe that was the case? I've never said corporations from China or Chinese corporations when I meant corporations in general. If I somehow made such a slip of the tongue I would correct myself immediately because it's so obvious it would be jarring to me. 

QS is standing behind her comment therefore they have to wear it. If they don't want to wear it they need to say she misspoke and was misinformed. Chinese investors are no threat to Quebec agricultural land as they are not permitted to buy it. Because of that they are unlikely to be in Quebec at the moment. Her senses are mistaken. 

You know I greatly admire both QS spokespeople and although I don't know Lessard-Therrien she seems like someone I would admire. I am willing to put her comment down to ignorance rather than racism even though she knew the federal law prevented them from buying land. What's bothering me is the evasion. It isn't big news so the evasion will probably work. It is still disillusioning and alarming.

Ya she quits and leaves public life.

I’m not in public life making money on the tax payers dime for starters. 

Want to elaborate on what I said offensive? Was it directed at someone’s etnicity? Religion? Sexual orientation? 

What a pile of nonsense. Good night, and keep up the good fight against racism. Including anglo-Canadian bigotry against francopones. I presume that you do know that it was closely linked to anti-Indigenous racism.

I am NOT going to waste a swath of my life speaking out against the many derogatory comments you have made about several groups of humans.

Better late than never, but I also hope QS learned from this including the leadership that fully backed her comment. 

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Better late than never, but I also hope QS learned from this including the leadership that fully backed her comment. 

Just curious as to your source for that statement - besides the issue of who you think "the leadership" of QS is. I'm a member, and nobody leads me. So that's two questions, when you have a moment.

Probably CTV news. GND stated they supported her, this was prior to her apology. This board also minimized her words when the board would have ripped a Liberal or Conservative to shreads for saying that. 

That does seem like partisanship to me. My admiration for QS is rooted in their integrity and authenticity. I do believe that they have to be somewhat pragmatic but that wasn't pragmatism. It was knee-jerk circle the wagons. 

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/a-new-poll-suggests-alberta-is-the-...

In contrast, in an October 2016 poll, 82 per cent of Quebecers said they have no desire to revisit the idea of sovereignty any time soon.

A political party should lead and should be true to its values but it should also know when it has lost an argument so needs to find a new approach. I am not saying QS should drop the idea from its philosophy but like the PQ, they need to acknowledge the numbers and prove themselves as a provincial government before pushing indepedence from Canada. 82% don't want to talk about it. 

pietro_bcc wrote:

Quebec Solidaire isn't a racist party. And it was certainly a valid concern that she brought up considering what's happening in the real estate market in North America's largest cities. Corrupt Chinese oligarchs are buying up real estate in big cities as stores of value. This is also happening with some agricultural land in Canada, but to a lesser extent than residential real estate (though not in Quebec because we have laws that prevent sale to non-residents, but with the right wing anti-regulation CAQ now in power, its fair to have some fear in such restrictions being loosened.) Perhaps she needs to be more precise in her language and actually spell out that she's refering to corrupt Chinese oligarchs and not just saying Chinese people. Frankly, ownership of any agricultural or residential property should be restricted to at least those who have permanent residency status.

We have a CAQ government that is pushing some of the most bigotted laws in decades and people are piling on to QS, complete nonsense.

We know CAQ is racist. QS is not supposed to be racist therefore we don't expect racist comments from them. There is no evidence that Chinese speculators have targeted Quebec agricultural land. There is no known threat to the law protecting Quebec agricultural land. 

If there is a pile-on it is because posters are defending a racist comment because it came from a QS representative. 

That is the definition of bias. It's okay for the QS to make racist statements but they are not really racist because it's the QS and the QS isn't racist therefore their statements can't be racist and anyway the CAQ is worse is not a defense it is prevaricating. 

It is the denial of responsibility that is making a mountain out of a molehill not the comment in and of itself. She wasn't talking about corporations in general. She was talking about Chinese corporations specifically. It doesn't matter that she was referring to corporations that belong to China not the Chinese people. US corporations would be just as interested in buying Quebec agricultural land as the Chinese. 

She specified Chinese and specified that they are predators currently present in Quebec checking out the land for purchase. 

Either that is a fact or not. 

I say it is not because it makes no sense. There would be no point in shopping around for land before trying to have the law changed.

Chinese land speculators is not one of the challenges facing Quebec. It was a stupid comment. QS reps need to be taught to stay on message; to address the issues QS has identified as a threat or harmful to the average Quebecer. 

What a shitty response. 

Just for clarification, in post #118, is it not stated that Lessard-Therrien did apologize? If that is true, what is the continuing issue here?

I don't have a dog in this fight: apart from the hypothetical possibility that I might consider voting QS if I lived in Quebec, I'm pretty much indifferent to them either way. I'm just not sure I understand what the controversy is about, at this point.

Pondering wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:

Just for clarification, in post #118, is it not stated that Lessard-Therrien did apologize? If that is true, what is the continuing issue here?

I don't have a dog in this fight: apart from the hypothetical possibility that I might consider voting QS if I lived in Quebec, I'm pretty much indifferent to them either way. I'm just not sure I understand what the controversy is about, at this point.

The leaders of QS initially defended her saying she hadn't said anything objectionable.  They have not retracted or apologized. In my eyes their defence of her was worse than what she said. 

So, if I've got this straight...

She said something.

People took exception to what she said.

The spokespersons(to go by their prefered title) defended her comments.

She later apologized for the comments.

The spokespeople did not apologize for their defense of her.

Okay, I can see how that could be awkward.

But, reading over the thread, it seems that both Lessard-Therrien and the spokespeople had previously been in agreement that it was just a bad choice of words. So I'm wondering why they just couldn't have continued to have that as their shared defense?

Or is it the case that only the spokespeople had argued that it was a bad choice of words, whereas Lessard-Therrien skipped that stage of the defense and went straight for the apology?

I actually agree with Ravary, though remember that she is very far from progressive, and had to end her screed with a red-scare era cliché. Lise, eco-socialists do NOT want Stalin. Not only because of the Gulags and disappeared, but also because of a far from environmentally-friendly view of development. Badly needed in poor and backward Russia and the rest of the USSR, but not very sensitively implemented to put it mildly.

Our MNA expressed herself badly, but am I too defensive to suspect "ethnic élites" tied to the Liberal party? Racism and bigotry are sadly very real, but so is a kind of politics based on ethnic élites "selling" their communities, usually to the Libs.

By the way, Will Prosper was also a candidate for QS, in the riding that includes Montréal-Nord.

Was it racism when Québec solidaire MNA for Rouyn-Noranda-Témiscamingue Émilise Lessard-Therrien and prefect Claire Bolduc described as “predatory” the methods of Chinese promoters — Chinese as in citizens of China, not Quebecers of Chinese ancestry — eager to buy agricultural land in her beautiful neck of the woods ? (If you’ve never visited the Témiscamingue region, do yourself a favour and go next summer. It is lovely.)

But what about all those Chinese speculators lurking in the woods checking out the farmland? The fact that elsewhere in the world chinese corporations are trying to buy up farmland does not mean chinese people who happen to go to Témiscamingue are land speculators. 

She did not claim there were Chinese trying to buy up land in other countries or other places within Canada. She said they are in Témiscamingue right now checking out the land even though there is a law against them buying it. I want to know which chinese people she is referring to in Témiscamingue. Which ones in particular should I be wary of? If a Chinese person tries to buy land how will we know which ones are the predators? 

It's disturbing to me that so many people are trying to deny the racism inherrent in her remarks about Chinese people in Témiscamingue. She was very specific that they are in her riding right now. She was not speaking generally. 

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

It's disturbing to me that so many people are trying to deny the racism inherrent in her remarks about Chinese people in Témiscamingue. She was very specific that they are in her riding right now. She was not speaking generally. 

Her remarks were not racist with respect to Chinese people. They were incautious, ill-advised, and QS should make a very clear statement to that effect, as should she. But your attempts to paint her as racist are incomprehensible to me.

I didn't say she is racist. I said her words were racist. Her words were not just incautious or ill-advised. Unless you can produce some Chinese speculators in Témiscamingue she was lying. 

She was very specific. She senses these Chinese speculators in Témiscamingue, not just the world in general, checking out the farm land. How exactly is she sensing them? Does she imagine them hidden amongst the tourists?

Chinese  from China are in the States and elsewhere buying agricultural land because they will need it to feed their people. Many countries have to buy food because they can't produce enough for themselves. It makes sense to me that they would try to buy agricultural land throughout the world to grow food on. There is nothing nefarious about that. It isn't predatory. 

We prefer to sell them the food instead so that we will reap the profits. That is an economic not moral choice. We are perfectly happy to let them invest in the oil sands, just not food. 

Assuming there are Chinese from China scoping out Témiscamingue farmland just in case the federal law is changed and they are allowed to buy land how would that be predatory? 

Predatory means "seeking to exploit or oppress others". I don't see why buying farmland to grow food to feed one's people is predatory. She said if they get land then Quebecers will never get to eat food from it. That's a pretty inflamatory statement. I'm pretty sure if they buy an apple orchard in Quebec (which they can't) they will sell apples to Quebecers. 

She did the right thing by apologizing. I would hope that people within QS and supporters of QS would explain to her why her words were racist instead of denying it. Sensing Chinese investors in Témiscamingue is racist. Maybe she meant she suspects they are there but that isn't much better. I think corporations from all countries are in general scoping out opportunities in every industry including agriculture but I doubt they are wasting time and money scoping out farmland where it is against the law for them to buy it. There is no reason for them to be in Témiscamingue. 

Politicians usually address issues currently facing their community. There are no predatory Chinese investors in Témiscamingue. I can't prove that because it's a negative but I think the onus is on QS to produce at least a hint of one. 

She invented a Chinese predator. It doesn't matter if she meant predators from China not Quebec Chinese people. There is no reason to look at any person of Chinese heritage in Quebec, foreign investor or not, as a predator. Would it be okay if she said she senses the Italian mafia is in Témiscamingue?

Are we going to argue that Quebec blackface isn't racist now? 

This reminds me of cross burnings on the lawns of Prince George. Like Hedy Fry she seems to have presented as fact things that were not facts to prove a point, in her case about speculation. Fry was trying to prove a point about racism and in fact did a disservice to anti-racist activists in the province. 

However although this MNA does not appear to be a conscious racist her attitude highlights the deep, deep strain of anti-Asian sentiment that permeates Canada and has since its inception as a white British  colony.