Quebec to English Speakers: Stay Out
Recently, in Canada, the predominantly French province of Quebec decided to double university tuition for non-Quebec students from the rest of Canada. The main motivation for this apparently is to offset the threat to the French language caused by the influx of many English-speaking Canadians who attend the three English universities in the province.
Did I just confuse the hell out of you yet? OK, I will rephrase the whole thing. Quebec doesn’t want all these Anglo-Canadians living in the province. So they double uni tuition for people from outside Quebec. Got it?
We Don’t Want You Here!
Consequently, many non-Quebec Canadians now have second thoughts about attending uni in Quebec. After all, as prestigious as McGill is, there is no shortage of even more prestigious Canadian universities outside of Quebec (at least if various university rankings are any guide). And they aren’t doubling their fees.
Of course, many businesses get all upset by it. Mainly, the government’s measure will devastate the three English universities in Quebec. And two of them are in the city of Montreal. I mean, we’re talking tens of thousands of students and visitors etc. who contribute to the local economy. Not to mention the cultural energy that all these young people bring. On top of that, international students are similarly affected (Quebec doesn’t want them either contaminate the French ethos with their presence). Just imagine how all that will affect the economy.
It’s Not About Money
See, but those arguing from an economic standpoint are really missing the point (pardon the pun). It ain’t about money, is it? At least, assuming the provincial premier didn’t intend to kill the economy in the first place, there must be some other reasons.
This decision cannot be analyzed purely from an economic perspective. It’s about heritage. It’s about culture. It’s about history. It’s about how a great many people in Quebec feel snubbed by English-speaking Canada. It’s about how a great many Quebecers attribute their morose economy to centuries of exploitation by Anglos. And to so many, flattening English-speaking universities must seem a good place to start Quebec’s revival.
I must say, at this juncture, that I think what the government has done is nuts. After all, millions of English-speaking tourists also visit Quebec each year. Are they going to charge them a fee to enter Quebec? But as I said earlier, it’s not about money. That’s why one can’t really use economics to try to convince the government to countermand its decision. So when I say the decision is nuts, it is only so if speaking from an economic point of view. Not so about one’s cultural destiny.
Sadly, outside of Montreal, the rest of Quebec won’t be directly impacted by this tuition hike. And Montreal alone doesn’t carry enough votes to threaten those in charge. This will certainly be a boon for other Canadian universities. At the end of the day, I’m afraid all Quebec has done is hurt itself. And it won’t help to revive French at all.
This Ain’t Unique
This whole story, however, brings to mind how often we have been subconsciously trained, or acculturated, if you will, to analyze situations primarily from an economic perspective. As if economic considerations are the only way to rationality. If we know history at all, we would know that very often economic issues are mere afterthoughts. Other things, maybe injustice, liberty, cultural heritage, etc., often take on much more importance. Let me share with you a couple more examples to illustrate my point.
Remember the Vietnam War? The US famously (or infamously) used game theory to conduct the war. That requires the other side to have the same definition and sense of rationality as the Americans. Of course that didn’t work! Body counts meant nothing to the Vietnamese. What, after all, is the price of freedom from colonial domination?
Or take the Chinese takeover of Hong Kong. Prior to 1997, when that became a reality, many observers were confident that China would never want to do anything to disrupt Hong Kong’s role. Reason? It contributed a lot to China’s economy. Some, back in the late 1980s, even argued that China wouldn’t want to run Hong Kong at all, but would likely just lease it to Britain again. What has actually happened does not need to be repeated here. Let’s just say all these pundits were proven wrong.
Conclusion
The upshot of this is that first, we cannot try to assess someone else’s decision based on our own rationality. What is unreasonable to me might be perfectly legitimate to you. Second, the economy is not the only thing that matters. In fact, in many situations, it might not matter at all. Until we can come to terms with this, we will forever bungle our way into totally misjudging others’ actions. We will not stop being absolute morons when attempting to negotiate with other people. And we will miscalculate our own ability to overcome the other side’s manoeuvres. Saying the other party is crazy or stupid might make us feel better about ourselves, but it doesn’t do anything to change the course of action.
