Slashdot Mirror


Spain's Crackdown on Catalonia Includes Internet Censorship (internetsociety.org)

Spain's autonomous Catalonia region wants to hold a referendum on independence next weekend. Spain's Constitutional Court insists that that vote is illegal, and has taken control of Catalonia's police force to try to stop the vote. They're deploying thousands of additional police officers and have seized nearly 10 million ballots. And now the Internet Society has gotten involved, according to an announcement shared by Slashdot reader valinor89: Measures restricting free and open access to the Internet related to the independence referendum have been reported in Catalonia. There have been reports that major telecom operators have been asked to monitor and block traffic to political websites, and following a court order, law enforcement has raided the offices of the .cat registry in Barcelona, examining a computer and arresting staff.

We are concerned by reports that this court order would require a top-level domain (TLD) operator such as .cat to begin to block "all domains that may contain any kind of information about the referendum."

42 of 363 comments (clear)

  1. Generalismo Fransico Franco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ain't dead yet!

    1. Re: Generalismo Fransico Franco by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 2

      The RWB list has a few problems in that it isn't about speech or free press as much as it is about how what RWB thinks about the country overall.

      A few examples:

      - They give negative marks to the US because the military bombed a building that had some journalists in it. Two died, but the rest survived, and the military gave them medical aid once they realized what had happened. If this was a free speech issue, they probably would have made sure to kill all of them.
      - The current year makes statements about Trump (none of those statements I agree with, BTW) about how he hates the press. Unless Trump is himself censoring the press, this is not even relevant.
      - The current year also makes statements about Trump denying media coverage of certain whitehouse events. While I would say yes, this is bad, the RWB doesn't seem to care at all about how other countries impose similar restrictions on not only their governments, but legal procedures as well.

      Furthermore, the RWB list only speaks about press issues. It does not at all take into account how Australia and Germany, which both scored higher than the US, censor the fuck out of video games. Germany also can and does censor websites, including one time when they censored Wikipedia, not to mention the EU as a whole likes to censor Google. Australia straight up bans some websites outright, and is currently implementing an illegal site blacklist and a pornography blacklist, the former of which can't be bypassed.

      https://upload.wikimedia.org/w...

      The RWB press freedom index is thus meaningless if you're talking about free speech, and is probably not very meaningful when talking about press freedom.

  2. Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trying to suppress people's freedom is the surest way of pissing them off. How many went from pro-union to pro-independence due to this nonsense?

    1. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by valinor89 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Quite a lot of people are very enraged by the actions of the government that were not thinking of voting.

    2. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nah, just call them Nazis. Then censoring them or even physically assaulting them is okay.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by marcansoft · · Score: 4, Informative

      The vote was already illegitimate; this is just going to slant it further. They already tried a non-binding "referendum" in 2014 with predictable results: 80% pro-independence (even though fair polls show more like 40%). The only way to have a fair referendum is to do it in a way that is approved and legal; the moment it becomes dodgy in any way, it severely biases the results because of course participation is going to be severely skewed towards people who want to vote yes.

      This is why the central government only really has two choices: they can either support a completely legitimate referendum (whether this can actually be done legally or not based on the Constitution is unclear), or they can wholly suppress attempts. They can't allow an illegitimate referendum to go through because the result is going to be obvious and not representative of the citizens' will. The pro-independence regional government has stated they intend to declare independence within 48 hours after a "yes" victory; this would be ridiculous in this case given that result would in no way be accurate with the current circumstances surrounding the referendum.

      (Note: I don't approve of the censorship part, just trying to explain what is going on.)

    4. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by Carewolf · · Score: 3, Informative

      The only way it is illegitimate is because the Spanish government has said they won't abide by it, but it can still be a legitimate referendum for the self-rule and in the eyes of the world.

    5. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by marcansoft · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except, you know, the independentist regional government's own poll that puts the split at 49.4% against/41.1% for independence.

      Seriously, you guys (as in the vehemently pro-independence crowd) just delegitimize yourselves by going down to Trump's "biggest inauguration crowd" level. This is obviously a contentious issue and the population is pretty much evenly split. An independent Catalonia would screw over half of Catalonia's population as much or even moreso than the status quo screws over the other half. Yes, this is a difficult problem, and yes, you have every right to campaign for independence, and yes, a solution that magically pleases everyone would be great, but it certainly isn't an open-and-shut-case.

    6. Re: Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by Faluzeer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Who is able to vote? All of Spain is affected by this, should they not all have a chance to vote?

      Hmmm

      That is the same argument that so many little Englanders expressed over here in blighty when Scotland wanted an independence referendum, of course those same people would have been outraged if it was suggested that the UK leaving the EU required a majority vote from all the EU countries. It should be the vote of the majority of people in the region/state/country that decides on independence.

    7. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So how do you propose to ever have change through a referendum when the status quo can just choose not to participate and thus make it "invalid", winning by default?

      Assume for a moment that there is a majority in favour of independence - how could they ever legally achieve their goal without the cooperation of national government?

      I'm actually asking, because I can't think of any way.

    8. Re:Well that is one way of ensuring a loss by Damnshock · · Score: 2

      Catalan here, living in Berlin.

      I can give you the example of my mother: 62 years old, thinking of retiring she was leaning towards union (even though her struggles to speak Spanish might have indicated differently) but the latest actions by the Spanish government have totally changed her mind.

      I was there last week and I was very unsettled by the "tension" that I felt around: people are scared, very scared. It must be way worse by now...

      I barely know anybody that is against a referendum, even the ones that are hardcore "pro-Spain", I really don't understand the attitude from the central government :'(

      And remember: all this because people want to express their opinion (regardless of what the law says, that doesn't make it *right*)

  3. This is the slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you start condoning Internet censorship for political reasons (for example, what has been going on with the Daily Stormer), it will never stop where you think.

    1. Re:This is the slippery slope by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you start condoning Internet censorship for political reasons (for example, what has been going on with the Daily Stormer), it will never stop where you think.

      The "Daily Stormer" was not censored, they just weren't supported by businesses. If they were censored, they wouldn't be back online and being hosted by some company in Iceland.

      Is it too much to ask of mods to grasp the truth of content before modding it? (mod me down, "-1 oww, my feels!")

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:This is the slippery slope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't play word games and call yourself anything other than an oppressor.

      It is political speech, suppressed on the basis of politics. It used to be that any company who deigned to offer communication services to the public understood itself to do so on a non-discriminatory basis as to the ideological content of that communication.

      Any business that thinks it has the right NOT to take that business should not be in the communication business. It makes no difference whether censorship is carried out by government, or corporations. The people are neither.

    3. Re:This is the slippery slope by VeryFluffyBunny · · Score: 2

      Before this thread disappears down Godwin's hole of off-topic internet comments, perhaps it's worth remembering the point of free speech is to make the world a better place. As Karl Popper, father of the modern scientific method, put it, we have to be intolerant of intolerance in order for tolerance to prevail. If you believe that the colour of a person's skin, their accent, their country of origin, their religion, class, or cultural background makes them subject to intolerance, your ideological stance is right there, shoulder to shoulder, with the alt-right thugs. Incitement to intolerance from any political position shouldn't be tolerated. Germany learned this the hard way and now has some very sensible anti-intolerance laws.

      --
      Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
    4. Re:This is the slippery slope by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't play word games and call yourself anything other than an oppressor.

      Way to play the victim!

      It makes no difference whether censorship is carried out by government, or corporations.

      So, you are upset that a intrinsically oppressive ideology is being oppressed? Doesn't is seem like they are getting exactly what they want? Oh, they want to be the oppressors, right.

      That's some serious mental gymnastics you got going on there, buddy.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  4. Not smart, but it is right by alexborges · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Cataluña has no reason to secede. Nationalists, who are basically localist fascists are the ones pushing for an impossible exit of cataluña from the Spain, when by the way, they werent anexed. Cataluña entered Spain voluntarily, more than 500 years ago. Now the spanish government though is anything but smart. Prime Minister Rajoy could almost qualify as a sea sponge if we are talking about intelligence. This is why this move on the Spanish part is sad, stupid, but not unforseen. It plays into the hands of the fucking cataluña nazis, which is what nationalists are.

    --
    NO SIG
    1. Re:Not smart, but it is right by johanw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Repressive governments don't like that. Look at the US and see how it reacted when some parts didn't want to belong to the US any more.

    2. Re:Not smart, but it is right by johanw · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Spanish party that is currently in power, the Partido Popular, is an indirect decendant of the Franco regime. Franco repressed would-be secceeders too, so thsi reaction is no surprise.

    3. Re:Not smart, but it is right by valinor89 · · Score: 3, Informative

      How strange, as far as history goes Spain did not exist 500 years ago. Are you speaking about when Catalonia was united with the Aragon crown? That was a dynastic union where a Catalan baron inherited the Crown of Aragon. I would put the inflexion point in 1714 where Catalonia sided with Charles of Austia in the spanish succesion war and lost against Philip V who started a very repressive policy against catalans. Also, I find quite ironic that they call the independence movement as nazis when most of them are spanish fascists that revere Franco's Spain.

    4. Re:Not smart, but it is right by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      Why is that ironic? The Nazis were on the same side as Franco. They sent troops and aircraft - the Condor Legion - to help him in the civil war.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:Not smart, but it is right by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It plays into the hands of the fucking cataluña nazis

      Witness the new political norm in action, people. Just label your opponents Nazis or fascists and then anything you do to them--be it censorship, assault, or even murder--then becomes justified. Such is modern political discourse.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re: Not smart, but it is right by Kokuyo · · Score: 2

      Let's not act like the civil war in the US was thought because the north found it ethicly unbearable to enslave those poor negros.

      That war had nothing to do with empathy for the plight of fellow human beings or lack thereof.

      Wars are tools of politics and ethics and politics so rarely mix, we might as well assume they didn't at all. Please stop acting like they did...

    7. Re:Not smart, but it is right by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the Partido Popular, is an indirect decendant of the Franco regime.

      This is an extremely inaccurate statement. Partido Popular is a typical European centre-right party, on the lines of Conservative Party in the UK or CDU in Germany.

      CLARIFICATION: I am a leftist who will never vote or support Partido Popular, much less after their numerous corruption problems.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    8. Re:Not smart, but it is right by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      And the ACLU *used to* fight legal battles on their behalf, arguing that they had a right to march just as much as anyone else. How times have changed, eh?

      See, for example, a statement made by a protester at UC Berkeley in January 2017 at a protest event that turned into a violent riot: "Your free speech is raping and killing us."

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    9. Re:Not smart, but it is right by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 2

      It's founder was a minister under Franco, and it has not been so long ago (the party was founded in 1989) that one can claim such bounds are a thing from the past and things have changed.

      My point was that it isn't a far-right party on the lines of what being pro-Franco would suggest. Bear in mind that Franco died in his bed (I was born 3 years later together with our Constitution) and our transition to a democracy was a peaceful process. This might sound a bit weird and Spain, at many different levels, might be quite weird for some people. But this is all about it: curious facts, weirdness, peculiarities. Partido Popular has been the main centre-right party for quite a few years already and, as such, is likely to be somehow appealing to some more-right-than-centre people. In any case, the modern PP has very little to do with pure fascism, but a lot with money-, church-, centralised-government-prone views.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
    10. Re:Not smart, but it is right by kenai_alpenglow · · Score: 2

      "Fascist" is what you call the people you don't agree with. Even if you happen to be one yourself (see "antifa", which is following in the steps of an infamous Austrian).

    11. Re:Not smart, but it is right by CustomSolvers2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      was willing to arrest public servants in order to proceed their goals

      I am starting to get a bit tired of explaining clearly misleading ideas (honestly denoting a quite bad basic understanding about how a big proportion of democracies are expected to work) about what I don't really care. Let's see if I need only this one comment with you.

      - Rajoy personal power like the one of all the remaining presidents in Spain since Franco is virtually inexistent. Even though his party has the majority in the parliament, he wouldn't be able to do too many things on this front if the opposition (e.g., the socialist party, its left-center counter-part) wouldn't approve it, but they do. In fact, all the parties in Madrid (+ some of them taking advantage from the situation to attack Rajoy a bit), the other regional governments, most of media and public figures (including the ones in Catalonia, traditionally associated with the independentism) don't agree with how this situation has evolved. At the moment, this process seems to be exclusively supported by some of the people voting these parties, by the official regional resources and by what seems a relevant international misinformation campaign.

      - All this process has been declared illegal by the highest court regarding all what affects the constitution. Just in case you don't know it, the judicial system is independent from the government. The Catalan government ignored that declaration + all the associated orders to stop that process (public servants not obeying orders from a court = acting illegally!). A court from Catalonia (independent like all the other courts and only linked to the aforementioned highest court because of their common interest in applying the law in Spain) ordered to arrest some people from the Catalan government because of being apparently misusing public resources. If a court tells you that you cannot do something, but you don't obey that order, the police (or "guardia civil" a police-like body) might come and arrest you.

      - Rajoy, well I guess that the internal affairs ministry (because again: Rajoy's power is very limited), decided to perform certain actions to make sure that the so-far-disobeying regional governments starts acting according to the law. But they didn't make any decision because they feel like doing it or to repress anyone's freedom or to comply with their fascist goals as you and others imply. They are simply one of the parts of a more complex mechanism formed by: parliament (issues laws and decides), judges/courts (make sure that everything is compatible with the laws) and president/ministries (perform the specific actions to ensure the two aforementioned outputs to succeed).

      - All what I am describing in this post is how most of modern western (European) countries work. All this could be known by virtually everyone after performing a quite simple research/learning. All this doesn't matter to me at all for two reasons: firstly, I am not Catalan/live in Catalonia/have nothing to win/lose with whatever happens in Catalonia; secondly, I don't care too much about politics and, mainly in Slashdot, I have zero interest in discussing about these issues. In fact, I promised myself (+ publicly, via posting it here) to try to avoid non-technical discussion in Slashdot as much as possible. I couldn't refrain myself this time because of reading so many extremely wrong posts. Lesson (re-)learned: from now, I will make an extra effort to ignore this kind of threads, no matter how much nonsense I see.

      --
      Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
  5. There is more by valinor89 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are also arresting "civilian" programmers for mirroring the banned pages in other domains and charging them with disobedience, malfaesence and other charges.

    1. Re:There is more by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Isn't Spain in the EU? How the hell is this allowed to happen?

      I mean, Brussels has so little to do they can micromanage the length of carrots and the yellowness of bananas. Clearly they must have the big stuff like free speech guaranteed everywhere.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:There is more by terjeber · · Score: 2

      There is also the issue that the EU thinks democracy is an evil idea that must be squashed wherever it rears its ugly head.

  6. And this after 2006 an auonomy treaty was signed by ffkom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not too long ago, in 2006, a majority in the Spanish parliament voted in favor of a treaty that intended to give Catalonia some more autonomy - only to be subsequently stopped by jurisdiction - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... for more on this.

    And now Spain has a government that seems inclined to follow in the foot steps of Erdogan and alike, who think that violence and oppression is the way to go if you don't like what some regional government has decided upon.

    It's really a shame how this conflict is being escalated for no good reason.

  7. The US had no reason to secede from the Empire by ffkom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Driven by local nationlists, the north American territories of the British Empire did absolutely illegal things when they seceded. How could those people dare to question the legal rule of their central government?

    And by the way, lot's of European countries would still be under the despotic rule of some emporer far away in Rome, had they not been "disobedient" to Roman law.

  8. Re:Not like this by elrous0 · · Score: 2

    Note that the issue here is not about independence or freedom of speech. It is about the authority to call a referendum, which the Spanish constutitution (which was accepted in a referendum by more than 66% of Catalonians) says belongs only to the central Government (or Parliament).

    Well, if 66% of Catalonians still support not seceding, then why are you so afraid of them having a vote?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  9. Re:Kinda wish you had by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The concept behind the Second Amendment was discredited and abandoned a long time ago. The founding fathers had a deep distrust of a standing army, and so the theory went that a well-regulated militia could instead serve to defend the nation. After a series of failures of militias to various crises, within a couple of decades there was a large standing army. Now the US military is so large and so heavily armed and trained that the sole remaining provision (the right to bear arms) is superficial at best. The Second Amendment isn't going anywhere, but as a bulwark against government it is a complete failure.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  10. Not smart and not right by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cataluña has no reason to secede. Nationalists, who are basically localist fascists are the ones pushing for an impossible exit of cataluña from the Spain, when by the way, they werent anexed.

    You can say exactly the same things about Scotland in the UK and Quebec in Canada. In both cases the regions were given a free vote (two in fact for Quebec) about whether they wanted to secede and in both cases the majority voted against it and the independence movements in both locations are now effectively muted for decades. So while Spain has been saying that "no country would tolerate this" they are utterly wrong: two countries have and it worked out well both times.

    If what you say is true then the Spanish government is being idiotic in its response. It should not only have allowed the vote but organized it too to ensure it is performed fairly. If you are right then such a vote would have been against independence and the problem goes away for several decades. Actively suppressing it is likely to greatly increase support for independence and the result will be some sort of election probably in favour of independence and then you'll have a resurgent independence movement which will cause you problems for decades and way well eventually result in independence!

    1. Re:Not smart and not right by johanw · · Score: 2

      So seceding would be illegal, but asking the population if they want to secede (and as a result for example, have the local government lobby for a change in the law) should be perfectly legal. If it is illegal to openly lobby for a law to change you live in a dictatorship.

  11. Guardia Civil... by VeryFluffyBunny · · Score: 2

    ...aren't the local police. They're a military organisation that carries out police-like duties. You'll often see them in the streets of Barcelona but it's generally not a good idea to ask them the time or for directions. On the other hand, you can have a friendly chat, especially in Catalan, with the local Guàrdia Urbana if you want to. They're the local police and they're standing in support of the referendum.

    --
    Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
  12. No, there's no "Spain's crackdown on Catalonia" by valentinus · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...and no, there is no censorship involved.

    Catalonia is not a colony.

    Catalonia has been always part of Spain, and a very important part. This was already so when the province of Hispania was created under the Roman Empire, imposing a layer of latin culture and roman institutions on top of the existing Iberian tribes. After the downfall of Empire, the visigoths ruled all of the Peninsula as a single kingdom for more than two centuries. The small christian kingdoms and principalities that from 711 to 1492 fighted the muslims were at times also fighting each other, but the general trend was that of strengthening alliances and uniting forces under the same religion, not unlike other places in Medieval Europe.

    Catalan counties were already integrated in a larger unit (the Kingdom of Aragon) in which different languages (such as castilian and catalan) already coexisted for two centuries before the marriage of the Catholic Monarchs. They no doubt kept their identity, but the same could be said of every other region. Asserting that those small medieval kingdoms survived into today's regions with zero intermingling, thus conforming clearly separate and distinct societies, is simply untenable.

    In the heyday of the Spanish Empire and till the 19th century, catalans (and basques, BTW) were not just part of the thing, but a *leading* part of it. You can find lots of catalan surnames in Hispanic American countries, many of them in well-to-do families (check out the names of some well known distilleries such as Bacardi, Brugal, Barceló, if you don't mind my alcoholic references).

    With the historical digression, I just wanted to point to the fact that there have been no borders inside Spain for many centuries. This is not some country with huge differences in racial/ethnic aspects, or torn out by religious strife. The interrelationships are deep and extended in time. At this point it's difficult to define exactly who is catalan or not. Is it just being born in today's arbitrarily defined administrative region what makes you catalan? Are you catalan if your parents were not? Are you catalan if you don't speak catalan? Are you catalan if you do speak catalan but don't live in Catalonia? The top 10 most frequent family names are the same in Cat and in the rest of Sp. Catalan is the first language of 36% of people living in Cat while Spanish is the first language for 46%. Catalan exports to Germany, to put an example, are less than half of those to its neighboring autonomous region of Aragon. Who gets to vote in a referendum?

    The fact is that since 1978 Sp has been a highly decentralized country, much more similar to federal Germany than to centralist France. Cat, being one of 17 autonomous regions, has had for almost 40 years plenty of effective "independence": both an autonomous government and parliament, capable of passing their own laws within a large margin, as long as they don't undermine the general interests of Sp as a whole, which doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

    If you ask me, this autonomy has been used to put the emphasis on the difference. Autonomous administration has reached all aspects of civil life, to a point that the presence of national institutions are scarcely felt, and the words "país", "nació" are used all the time to refer to Cat and not to Sp. There's a huge part of the population whose first language is Spanish, yet it is not possible to study primary nor secondary school in Spanish (due to the official policy of "linguistic immersion"). Regional governments have spent a lot of money and effort in building their image, uniformizing and boosting the usage of catalan language, confering dignity to their institutions, projecting an international image, etc. etc. The regional PM is paid almost twice as much as Rajoy - not bad for an "oppressed nation"!

    At the same time, complaints about things that don't go well are targeted to a ghostly oppresive presence, the "State", the "Central Government". The idea of Spain is ass

  13. Re:Hey Quebec, by dryeo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since the last referendum, the federal government has passed the clarity act. Has to be a clear super majority rather then 50%+1. Quebec leaving also means amending the Constitution, with an amendment that requires 100% of the Provinces agreeing. There also will need to be a discussion of how much territory Quebec can keep. What they entered Confederation with? Or what the Feds bought from the Hudson's Bay Company. Of course the natives won't want to go either and they're a Federal responsibility.
    Quebec leaving is not as simple as the separatists have preached.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  14. Re:Hey Quebec, by EvilAlphonso · · Score: 2

    And yes, Quebec enforced use of those words, even when they don't bother in France! (The stop signs are ARRÊT in Quebec, but STOP in France (and yes, the French do say "Stop").

    It's understandable - some of the Quebec French-isms are a mouthful compared to the more compact anglicism (which is probably why they never caught on), while the more compact ones have actually stuck and have been adopted by France.

    Actually, the verb "stopper" (meaning "to stop") has been in use in French since at least the 1840s (it was used in Balzac's Comédie Humaine "Cousin Pons" from 1847). Once it's been used by a great French author, it's automagically considered as "valid French and a French invention thank you very much". Note that there is also a "stopper" (meaning "to darn") in use since at least the 1730s, that was borrowed from Dutch (stoppen -> restauper -> estoper -> stoper -> stopper). Of course, both of those may be too modern for the Quebec's language police.

    The French spoken in Quebec is basically an archaic regional dialect predating the French revolution and the standardization of the language that followed, so much so that I (a native French speaker) need subtitles when there's a person from the country side of Quebec interviewed on TV. When I encounter people from Quebec cities, I can sort of understand most of what they are saying except for some weird Quebec-only expressions. I have no issues whatsoever understanding Canadians from outside Quebec when they speak French.

  15. Re:And this after 2006 an auonomy treaty was signe by johanw · · Score: 2

    > They want to stand eternally against the evil Spain

    We Dutch know that can take some time, we had the 80 year war (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighty_Years%27_War) with Spain to gain our independence.