Quebec as a Nation

[Sassylassie]

Quebec wants to be a nation well my question is this: How do the Natives feel about having their land and their people hyjacked by the French after all this is their land isn't it? We won the war did we not, and English Canada and the Natives fought together so why are we handing Quebec over to the French. What makes up the majority in Quebec? French, or English combined with Natives, Metis, and immigrants and who decides which group will compile said Nation?

To the above analogy by John are you mad? Please comparing Quebec with the Palestinian people is assine, Quebec gets far more than it gives visa vie transfer payments so please let we the little people know how you can possibly compare Palestine with Quebec?

 

[the caracal kid]

Agreed, but I don't see that Quebec's suffered particularly in that way, or that I suggested that it should.

That's not how I feel and I'm not of that camp. That's a remarkably silly straw man argument.

It is no small surprise that the Quebecois became so aggressive in protecting their disticntiveness (in fact themelves) as a result of the discrimination french speaking peoples suffered for many years.

I was just teasing you a bit with the "camp" question. I just find it amusing when the dominant culture/language complains about a minority daring to protect its customs and language. The prototype for a minority to protect its cultural/language customs and distinctiveness is the jewish people. Given their small population size (throughout history), if not for very well designed customs they would have been absorbed into the larger populations. I think it is wonderful they have accomplished this, and that the world benefits from their culture surviving. I feel the same should happen with the french canadian culture. We should grant Quebec every opportunity to preserve its distinctiveness. They deserve it. We deserve it.

 

[Dalreg]

Does anyone in Quebec view Saskatchewan as being a nation? No. So why would I view Quebec as being a nation.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

It is no small surprise that the Quebecois became so aggressive in protecting their disticntiveness (in fact themelves) as a result of the discrimination french speaking peoples suffered for many years.

Also agreed, but they've been quite successful at protecting themselves in the last 40 years or so, thanks to public intellectuals like Marchand, Pelletier, Trudeau, Levesque, and others, and the passing of parochial and corrupt leaders like Duplessis, and the waning of the Catholic Church's influence in public life.

I was just teasing you a bit with the "camp" question.

Yeah, I figured that out after a while. Good thing I had a sober second thought and did some editing before hitting the "Submit Reply" button. My first response was, um... well, somewhat irritated, to put it charitably, until I recognized that that's never been your style and I must have misunderstood something.

We should grant Quebec every opportunity to preserve its distinctiveness. They deserve it. We deserve it.

Agreed again, mostly; it enriches us all, but maybe not every opportunity: every opportunity short of secession. In fact I think Quebec is probably safer within the federation than it would be alone. And as The Economist magazine editorialized years ago, on the eve of the first referendum, if even the Canadians can't keep things together peacefully, there's no hope for the rest of us.

Besides, I want my Montreal Canadiens.

 

[John Muff]

I would, If you ask me to...

Does anyone in Quebec view Saskatchewan as being a nation? No. So why would I view Quebec as being a nation.

If 50% +1 of you would ask; I would be glad to recognize you as sovereign. As we expect in Quebec... Dos saskatchewanian speek spanish in a large majority, and I wouldn't be aware of it?

I would love to deferenciate a Nova Scocian from an Albertain without judging or being judged... We do are different, and the Canadian denial is just making the mistake of letting "separatist", as they call them, instead of "Souvrainistes", take advantage of that non-recognition.

To conclude, I think that the capitalism create the problem of having the government, volontarly stoping these movement and breaking laws to go arround the "problem".

Til we get our "chance" to vote,
Have a good one...

John Muff

 

[McDonald]

As Stéphane Dion and Pierre Trudeau before him have said, I have no personal problem with calling Québec a «nation» in a sociological context, but it's when certain politicians ask for constitutional recognition of that where I draw the line. No francophone needs the Canadian constitution to recognise his «distinctness» to protect him. It is power-seeking politicians who need this, so that they can have more power to decide where the money goes when it comes from Ottawa. Québec is a distinct society, I can handle that, but I also maintain that Newfoundland is just as distinct. In fact, each province has its own cultural particularities when compared to the others and to the states below. Québec just happens to be the only majority francophone province... big deal. I agree that French should be promoted and protected in Québec, but I also want that for the rest of Canada. As for Québec «culture», if you take the language difference out of the equation, it's not much different from other Canadian provinces. The music is the same as folk music from other parts of Canada, it's just sung in a different language. The list goes on.

Québec doesn't just belong to the francophones who live here. It also belongs to the anglophones and aboriginals who live here as well, and the allophones who have become residents and citizens. And it also belongs to Canada. And like Dion said in his open letter to Lucien Bouchard some years ago, there is no article of international law that recognises Québec's territory, but does not recognise Canada's.

It's time for Bloquistes and Péquistes to grow up and accept and embrace that they are Canadians too, who are totally free and equal under the law to any other Canadian. Canada has worked hard to become a bilingual state, which means that if any francophone Canadian is stuck somewhere (like say, Lebanon) he or she WILL be assisted by Canadian consular services in French. That when a law is written and passed int his country, it will be published in French as well as English. And the list goes on.

I wish this question would just die. It is a waste of our time as a country. Québec is not a nation, and it will never separate from Canada.

 

[Hamlet]

If 50% +1 of you would ask; I would be glad to recognize you as sovereign. As we expect in Quebec... Dos saskatchewanian speek spanish in a large majority, and I wouldn't be aware of it?

Is 50%+1 really what you want? I mean, it sounds good and all until you end up on the 50%-1 side. For example, if 50%+1 wanted abortion outlawed, would you go along with it? If 50%+1 thought that shops should be closed on Sunday, is that fair to the 50%-1? Sometimes, 50%+1 is not enough when weighing in the rights of minorities. For example, smoking bans are almost universally unpopular with bar owners and patrons. But that is weighed in with the rights of workers to a smoke free environment.

I would love to deferenciate a Nova Scocian from an Albertain without judging or being judged... We do are different, and the Canadian denial is just making the mistake of letting "separatist", as they call them, instead of "Souvrainistes", take advantage of that non-recognition.

Simply saying, "we are different" doesn't make it so. Go and ahead and give us concrete examples of how you are different from an Albertan or a Nova Scotian. Worry about being judged later. Frankly, I'm curious how you see Albertans or anyone else outside of Quebec.

Til we get our "chance" to vote,
Have a good one...

John Muff

You've already had two chances. How many chances do you want?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

We are different, and the Canadian denial is just making the mistake of letting "separatist", as they call them, instead of "Souvrainistes", take advantage of that non-recognition.

I think that's part of the problem right there. Those words don't seem to mean the same thing to English and French speakers. A "Souvraintiste" (I don't think you spelled it right and I'm not sure I have either, but you know what I mean) any English speaker will take to mean a Sovereigntist, which means complete sovereignty for Quebec in all matters, which cannot imply anything but complete secession. But from paying close attention to the referendum campaigns, that doesn't appear to be what it means to "Souvraintistes," and if it does, then people like Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizeau are shockingly disingenuous and deceitful. (Actually I think they are, for other reasons, but that's another subject.) I don't understand French well enough to be sure, but it seemed to me in the last referendum campaign that BQ and PQ members were telling Les Quebecois that they could keep their Canadian passports and currency and postage and so on, that Quebec would be recognized as a signatory to all international treaties and trade agreements Canada is part of, and right down to little details like Quebec dairy farmers being able to keep their milk quotas for supplying Ontario. That's not secession or sovereignty, that's no different from the way things are now.

Quebec politicians would do us all a great service by clarifying exactly what it is they want and not lying to their voters about what Canada and the world will continue to give them after a successful referendum, and in particular stop making such heroic assumptions about that. They should also stop pretending that Canada is divisible but Quebec is not so they can dismiss all the First Nations' concerns about secession. I have a great deal of empathy for Quebec's position and aspirations, but what I've seen of the separatist movement over the years strongly suggests what it wants is all the benefits of being a province of Canada with none of the costs, and all the benefits of being a sovereign country with Canada paying the costs. Not gonna happen.

 

[Gonzo]

Where does it end? Everyone is different. First Nations are unique. English Canadians are unique. Why have a country? What about those in Quebec who want to stay in Canada? Can they separate from Quebec? Separatist have lost two referendums. I think Quebecers have made their decision. Quebec is not a nation because Quebec is not a country. It's that simple.

 

[the caracal kid]

dexter sinister wrote:

"In fact I think Quebec is probably safer within the federation than it would be alone."

I agree with you dex.

I think as a people though we need to distinguish between a "nation" and a "country". I think there is room for distinct nations within the framework of one country. At issue is what is the federation? I think it is time to sort out what the federation of nations that defines canada is. On the opposite side of the page, no doubt, are those that think multiculturalism is a failure and we should move towards a monoculture of sorts. I don't think maintianing our distinct cultures as something we pull out of the closet once a year for "culture X celebration" is the route to a strong union of regions. To address the nationhood of Quebec we need to address "what is canada?".

Are you the gambling type? I know many are not. It seems almost the canadian way to play it safe. "What we have works so don't mess with it." I don't think what we have works with the reality of what canada is today. We need to role the dice to redefine canada. Even with the risk of a break-up, leading to that ever alluded at annexing by the USA, I think the result would be worth it (but it might not be). It would be a fun ride though, don't you think? If the people of canada had to work to define canada, just maybe that "national identity" that seems so lacking would emerge.

 

[s_lone]

I think that's part of the problem right there. Those words don't seem to mean the same thing to English and French speakers. A "Souvraintiste" (I don't think you spelled it right and I'm not sure I have either, but you know what I mean) any English speaker will take to mean a Sovereigntist, which means complete sovereignty for Quebec in all matters, which cannot imply anything but complete secession. But from paying close attention to the referendum campaigns, that doesn't appear to be what it means to "Souvraintistes," and if it does, then people like Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizeau are shockingly disingenuous and deceitful. (Actually I think they are, for other reasons, but that's another subject.) I don't understand French well enough to be sure, but it seemed to me in the last referendum campaign that BQ and PQ members were telling Les Quebecois that they could keep their Canadian passports and currency and postage and so on, that Quebec would be recognized as a signatory to all international treaties and trade agreements Canada is part of, and right down to little details like Quebec dairy farmers being able to keep their milk quotas for supplying Ontario. That's not secession or sovereignty, that's no different from the way things are now.

What about the European Union? Isn't that a model of many sovereign countries co-oexisting with common benefit? I can tell you that many "seperatists" have this type of deal in mind when it comes to seperating Quebec from Canada. A country of Quebec within a Canadian Union would truly be a dream come true for many Quebecers... I'll include myself in that...

I was born and grew up in Quebec city and French is my mother tongue. I can tell you that the word "souveraineté" is a clever mix of "seperation" and "independance". A strong portion of "seperatists" do indeed want the advantages of having an independant country of Quebec, while conserving the advantages of being part of a Canadian community.

I can assure you that the only way for Canada to solve its problem with Quebec seperatists is to go forward with a drastic review of provincial power. Quebecers are simply not satisfied with a centralist Canada and the seperatist threat will go on for as long as Canada refuses to decentralize significantly.

The big problem is this: when Quebecers fighting for independance talk about decentralization, they mean it! The canadian view of decentralization is soft core... The Québecois view is hard core...

 

[s_lone]

Does anyone in Quebec view Saskatchewan as being a nation? No. So why would I view Quebec as being a nation.

Most Quebecers probably never even imagined the concept of Saskatchewan calling itself a nation... But you'd be surprised how many people in Quebec would accept the idea with open arms... They would just find it very funny...

 

[s_lone]

I always find it very funny when I hear the "French lost the war" argument.

If you want to go down the "war logic" path all I can say is that the war isn't over and that the Québecois have been pretty damned clever, especially in the last 40 years or so. They've managed an incredible feat into manipulating Canada to satisfy their own interests. I'm the first to admit Quebec has got itself a pretty good deal in the present situation...

War never ends my friends...

 

[sanctus]

What about the European Union? Isn't that a model of many sovereign countries co-oexisting with common benefit? I can tell you that many "seperatists" have this type of deal in mind when it comes to seperating Quebec from Canada. A country of Quebec within a Canadian Union would truly be a dream come true for many Quebecers... I'll include myself in that......

You're comparing apples to oranges. I hate to burst the bubble of the people ofQuebec, but they have never been a nation from the get-go. they have been a French colony, an English colony, than a part of Canada. A distinct society, of course. no argument. But a sovereign nation with its own political history they have never been.
They are Canadian, just like the rest of us. It is rather insulting, when you think about it, that they continue to mock the very nation they benefit from.

 

[sanctus]

Where does it end? Everyone is different. First Nations are unique. English Canadians are unique. Why have a country? What about those in Quebec who want to stay in Canada? Can they separate from Quebec? Separatist have lost two referendums. I think Quebecers have made their decision. Quebec is not a nation because Quebec is not a country. It's that simple.

The separtist cause reminds me of the spoiled kid who won't take no for an answer. No matter how much they are told no by their own people, they will try again. One wonders how many times they have to be told no before they behave themselves.,

 

[sanctus]

What about the European Union? Isn't that a model of many sovereign countries co-oexisting with common benefit? I can tell you that many "seperatists" have this type of deal in mind when it comes to seperating Quebec from Canada. A country of Quebec within a Canadian Union would truly be a dream come true for many Quebecers... I'll include myself in that.....

So, in other words, the perfect solution would be to let Quebec be independent, but in an association with Canada so that Quebec can still receive some monies from Ottawa. Is that about the gist of what you're saying here?

 

[s_lone]

Actually, not quite.

Ideally, if Quebec were an independant state part of new form of Canadian community, I would expect Ottawa to be a place where money is sent but does not come back. "Confederal" money would be spent exclusively on issues that relate to the whole Canadian community and that cannot be spent differently from province to province, or country to country, depending on the context.

In other words, Ottawa would not be a place where the regions fight to get their share of money. Their would be no more waiting after federal transfers before moving on with regional projects.

 

[hermanntrude]

do i recognise oxygen as being different from the rest of the air? yes of course i do, but would it make any difference if i didnt?

 

[BitWhys]

Congratulations to PM Harper for his motion on Quebec

that Quebec be recognized as a nation within a united Canada. Credit where its due. He could have dragged it out to make the Liberals squirm.

bravo

 

[DurkaDurka]

it was a good response to the bloc's motion of having Quebec recognized as a nation outside of Canada.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...721&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154
"The surprise move was in response to a Bloc Quebecois motion calling for Quebecers to be recognized as a nation — but not within Canada."