I would like to discuss a small portion of the Independence movement for Quebec that I have found to be prominent today. I welcome any thoughts that any of you may have, and hope to build a constructive and intelligible argument so that we may all better understand this issue. If anyone has anything to say to me directly, please do not hesitate to email me, especially if there are any other public arenas that may also be suitable for me to use to broadcast my ideas.
Action vs Inaction:
There is a great deal of speculation as to how effective the acquisition of sovereignty will resolve the economic shortcomings of any political body, or, perhaps more importantly, if it will ensure the preservation of Quebec's beautiful culture any better than the previous governing body. Many have said that Quebec's independence would not directly address its own internal struggles, and furthermore, that separating itself from its parent country is more likely to cause additional harm to the already worsening state of Quebec.
Alternately, one cannot ignore Quebec's struggle. History would show that time and time again, the needs of Quebec have been neglected, almost as if to suggest the intent to unravel the cultural differential of Quebec to her sister provinces. Canada's government and constitutional format is designed to serve Canada's majority population, and as the people of Quebec know, they are not the majority population. Pressure from the government is evident in the form of subtle cultural suppression, trade restrictions, and the forced reliance of Canada's Provinces on the Federalist governing body in both a political and economic environment.
So here lies the problem. Confronted with the uncertainty of a future that being a part of Canada entails, what should the people of Quebec do if it is there intention to make a better future for herself, and for her people. From a realistic point of view, both arguments are sound and valid, but there is yet another thought that one must consider. Both arguments are based on speculation. Speculation, though often grounded with facts and statistic, is still only speculation. Any person who operates on the same presumptions that any "speculation" suggests is investing far too much value in humanity's ability to forecast the future. As far as I can see, there are only two realistic options that Quebec has made available to herself.
Option 1. Remain part of the Canadian nation and subscribe to its constitution, economic structure, and societal system. Most political and economic issues that present themselves in Quebec will be at the discretion of the Canadian government. It has already been determined that the societal and political needs of Quebec and Canada differ, which means there will perhaps always be a cultural barrier within Canada's borders so long as Quebec is in its governmental domain.
Option 2. Quebec peacefully but assertively separates itself from its parent nation and assumes control over its own internal struggles. Regardless of the outcome, Quebec will have absolute control over itself with authority invested in its own people, thereby limiting the possibility of economic and legislative blunder at the fault of cultural misunderstanding.
The people of Quebec need to ask themselves how hard they are willing to work at achieving their goals. On the surface, revolution takes the form of territorial dispute, governmental reform, and economic restructure, but at its core, true revolution is always about one thing. The people. If the people of Quebec do not feel that Canada can help them cultivate the greatness inside of them, then one must question which they treasure more: Their life as they know it, or the potential of what they can become.