weigh_in epitome of incomprehensibility Sometimes you see other people putting weights into the middle of a circle, and you want to put one in too. Sometimes you do. You want to make sure you put in a weight you can lift, because trying to lift a weight you can't lift or don't know how to carry will just make you look silly among the others in the group. Say they're talking about "Brexit" - UK leaving the European Union - and you chime in that there seems to be a correlation between nationalism and racism, even if the cause-n-effect ain't clear. But your weight is decorated with ribbons saying "Quebec nationalism" and "Although English speakers aren't oppressed here - I reject that idea - but here are nationalists being racist to other groups - Muslims, etc." First of all, that's a long ribbon, and people haven't heard of your ribbon. They don't know the significance of "Money and the ethnic vote" and "Quebec Charter of Values." So they're likely to ignore the weight. Maybe the better thing is to put a feather in. Just a feather. Lightly tickle the argument of weights piling up in the middle. 160624 ... past the way "english speakers aren't oppressed here" becomes a familiar qualifying refrain should be a sign, but its so well established it's just another whistle in the wind. its weight immaterialized. 160625 ... e_o_i I haven't actually heard people say "English-speakers aren't oppressed in Quebec" very often. I was just stating it as a general truth based on my knowledge and personal experience of the last two and a half decades. ("Disadvantaged" might be true, though, just as French-speakers are disadvantaged in many other parts of Canada; "oppressed" is too strong a word.) But you mean that it's used as a supposed mitigation for racism in the PQ establishment? I see how people could do that: "Oh, Muslim people can't be oppressed! See, other minorities in Quebec, like, say, white people who speak English, aren't oppressed!" And that's... not cool. My general point was that nationalism seems to attract racists, and I just used Quebec as an example because I know a little bit about it. (My point on blather, besides having fun mixing metaphors, was that I often feel the need to have my contribution to a debate noticed even when my contribution ends up being irrelevant or unrelatable to others. And that it'd be better for me not to worry so much about Being Respected or similarly ego-stroked.) Phew. It does take longer to explain things in easy-to-follow prose. George Orwell had a point. 160626 ... past hmm. i didn't quite mean it that way. it seems more an article of faith than a justification. an example: someone complains about having to fill out a form in english at a unilingually english university in ontario: "it's a bilingual country!" someone else says "but the street signs even in bilingual parts of quebec are all in english, though in ontario they're bilingual." "are you suggesting the english are oppressed in quebec?" which was not the point, but still somehow came up. i think part of the problem with a canadian nationalism is that the anglo ethno-nationalism has been taking a beating for decades. (this is probably a good thing.) there's been rear guard actions but the umbrella is opening and the britishness and imperial nostalgia is less and less important. other nationalisms in our pot operate differently, with different hot buttons. (i have to confess 'the english are not oppressed in quebec' is one of mine. it triggers something. i wrote and deleted my previous tweet a few times.) 160627 what's it to you? who go blather from