Support for Seperatists down
- Thread starter Jersay
- Start date
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
Hey five, are you sure that they would need the support of seven provinces? I thought the supreme court ruling, and the clarity act essentially said that quebec needs a clear question on separation and a clear majority, and that the federal government decides what is clear question and clear majority. So in essence, quebec can not unilaterally separate from Canada, but could do so if they also had the support of the federal government. The House of Commons would only have to "take into account the views" of the provinces & senate, but no specific mention of 7/10 provinces. Of course, I doubt any federal government would allow to quebec to separate unless they had an overwhelming majority. But perhaps I am misinterpreting the clarity act?
FiveParadox said:
Hey five, are you sure that they would need the support of seven provinces? I thought the supreme court ruling, and the clarity act essentially said that quebec needs a clear question on separation and a clear majority, and that the federal government decides what is clear question and clear majority. So in essence, quebec can not unilaterally separate from Canada, but could do so if they also had the support of the federal government. The House of Commons would only have to "take into account the views" of the provinces & senate, but no specific mention of 7/10 provinces. Of course, I doubt any federal government would allow to quebec to separate unless they had an overwhelming majority. But perhaps I am misinterpreting the clarity act?
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
Kind if a stupid reason to want to carve up our nation no? Regardless my mother is French-Canadian, i'm 1/2 Frenchy so I think I have a certain degree of right to fly off the handle like I do in regards to Quebec. I spent enough time in North Hatley, I think i've earned at least that much.
Jersay said:
Kind if a stupid reason to want to carve up our nation no? Regardless my mother is French-Canadian, i'm 1/2 Frenchy so I think I have a certain degree of right to fly off the handle like I do in regards to Quebec. I spent enough time in North Hatley, I think i've earned at least that much.
tamarin said:
There is a flaw in your position. The curriculum requirements of Canadian schools, does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Federal government. Education is the responsibility of each province.
If students in Quebec are more knowledgable of their french history than are English speaking students in the rest of Canada, then it is a failing of the education system in those provinces. The province and government of Quebec has no obligation to ensure that English speaking students in Ontario have adequate knowledge of their English roots. Quebec doesn't care if the students in Ontario are idiots. Likewise, Ontario doesn't care if the students in Quebec are idiots.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Clarity Act was designed to prevent a referendum where the question posed, was highly ambiguous. I believe the Clarity Act only gives the Federal government the authority to say whether or not the question of separation is adequate enough to be posed to the people.
I believe the Federal government would have to make a decision on the clarity of the question prior to it being voted on by the people -- not after the fact. What kind of democracy rules a question invalid after it has already been posed to the people? I'm sure the federal government would be a day late and a buck short in proceeding with those kind of tactics.
Do you give the Quebec government the go ahead to hold a referendum and then declare the result invalid, just because you lost?
Besides, if Quebec were to hold a referendum on separation, and if the separatists were to win, the ruling Quebec government would defy any and all orders of the federal government and/or supreme court. In the view of the Quebec government, they would have received a clear mandate from the people, and they would proceed to conduct themselves as a sovereign nation.
The federal government would have only one option: Military force.
gc said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Clarity Act was designed to prevent a referendum where the question posed, was highly ambiguous. I believe the Clarity Act only gives the Federal government the authority to say whether or not the question of separation is adequate enough to be posed to the people.
I believe the Federal government would have to make a decision on the clarity of the question prior to it being voted on by the people -- not after the fact. What kind of democracy rules a question invalid after it has already been posed to the people? I'm sure the federal government would be a day late and a buck short in proceeding with those kind of tactics.
Do you give the Quebec government the go ahead to hold a referendum and then declare the result invalid, just because you lost?
Besides, if Quebec were to hold a referendum on separation, and if the separatists were to win, the ruling Quebec government would defy any and all orders of the federal government and/or supreme court. In the view of the Quebec government, they would have received a clear mandate from the people, and they would proceed to conduct themselves as a sovereign nation.
The federal government would have only one option: Military force.
Simpleton, you miss the point. You insist that Quebec has the right to protect its cultural roots and traditions. I agree with that. Yet the English, co-founders of the nation, are obviously expected to honour a multicultural Canada first. Provinces are responsible for education. But it's entirely hopeless now to think Ontario will stand up for English Canada in its schools the way that Quebec does in its. We are expected, unlike Quebec, to represent the broader Canadian community. As time slips on the difference will merely be exaggerated. Quebec has special status and thus French culture and tradition is respected. Ontario does not.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
Yeah now it is. There's no point in seperating for any reason. Half frenchy. Cool. Yeah sure you have.
Mogz said:
Yeah now it is. There's no point in seperating for any reason. Half frenchy. Cool. Yeah sure you have.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
I think you are partially correct. I think the question would have to be clear before the referendum. However, it also states that quebec must have a "clear majority" (as well as a clear question) in order to separate, and that it is the federal government which determines the definition of a "clear majority". That could mean that they would need some sort of supermajority, say 2/3 or something like that, but I suppose technically the federal government could make that majority as high as they want. But I could be wrong.
Simpleton said:
I think you are partially correct. I think the question would have to be clear before the referendum. However, it also states that quebec must have a "clear majority" (as well as a clear question) in order to separate, and that it is the federal government which determines the definition of a "clear majority". That could mean that they would need some sort of supermajority, say 2/3 or something like that, but I suppose technically the federal government could make that majority as high as they want. But I could be wrong.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
I'm sorry, tamarin. If you made a point, I obviously missed it. What was your point, again?
Yes, the English portion of Canada is expected to respect a multi-cultural Canada. Or, minimally, a bilingual Canada. The point I was attempting to make, was that the French people, being relatively few in number, will never pose a threat to English culture or language. Conversely, the English speaking population, being the overwhelming majority, do pose a threat to the French language culture.
So, you might be asking yourself, where is this threat most prevelant? The answer, quite simply, is everywhere. Whether it be street signs that are not bilingual, or the overwhelming abundance of English language media, from your beloved newspapers, right on through to television and radio programming. Federal politics is conducted, for the most part, in English. Almost everything in Canada is done in English.
The French speaking population do not want to convert the rest of Canada to the French language and culture, they merely want to slow or eliminate the English speaking population's encroachment into their relatively small place in Canada. And to do this requires vigilant guardsmen... aka: the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois. And this is the reason that I don't share the same view of the separatists as many Canadians do.
tamarin said:
I'm sorry, tamarin. If you made a point, I obviously missed it. What was your point, again?
Yes, the English portion of Canada is expected to respect a multi-cultural Canada. Or, minimally, a bilingual Canada. The point I was attempting to make, was that the French people, being relatively few in number, will never pose a threat to English culture or language. Conversely, the English speaking population, being the overwhelming majority, do pose a threat to the French language culture.
So, you might be asking yourself, where is this threat most prevelant? The answer, quite simply, is everywhere. Whether it be street signs that are not bilingual, or the overwhelming abundance of English language media, from your beloved newspapers, right on through to television and radio programming. Federal politics is conducted, for the most part, in English. Almost everything in Canada is done in English.
The French speaking population do not want to convert the rest of Canada to the French language and culture, they merely want to slow or eliminate the English speaking population's encroachment into their relatively small place in Canada. And to do this requires vigilant guardsmen... aka: the Bloc Quebecois and the Parti Quebecois. And this is the reason that I don't share the same view of the separatists as many Canadians do.
And your point is and your answer is where? Waste of time.
Speaking of Quebec and Quebec's ability to protect French culture and traditions: interesting letter to the editor in today's Globe. A cottage owner just inside the Quebec border with Ontario stated that it's illegal to sell any such property to a non-Quebecer. Intriguing. It certainly does give new meaning to a Quebec first policy.
Speaking of Quebec and Quebec's ability to protect French culture and traditions: interesting letter to the editor in today's Globe. A cottage owner just inside the Quebec border with Ontario stated that it's illegal to sell any such property to a non-Quebecer. Intriguing. It certainly does give new meaning to a Quebec first policy.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
I find it rather amusing that you would read so many newspapers, tamarin. You obviously have great difficulty in understanding English in its written form.
I have no idea what you are referring to. I am fully able to understand your post, but I fail to see the relevance, and your relation of this story is quite short of details.
From what I gather from your post, a resident of Quebec owns some property that is within Quebec's border. The owner of this property alleges that he is not legally able to sell this property to any person that is not a resident of Quebec. My question, quite simply, is this: Says who?
Any person living in Canada, has a constitutional right to take up residence in any of Canada's provinces or territories. By strict letter of the law, ownership of property in Quebec, would make a person a resident of Quebec.
Again, please provide sufficient detail when relating a story of such dubious subject matter.
tamarin said:
I find it rather amusing that you would read so many newspapers, tamarin. You obviously have great difficulty in understanding English in its written form.
I have no idea what you are referring to. I am fully able to understand your post, but I fail to see the relevance, and your relation of this story is quite short of details.
From what I gather from your post, a resident of Quebec owns some property that is within Quebec's border. The owner of this property alleges that he is not legally able to sell this property to any person that is not a resident of Quebec. My question, quite simply, is this: Says who?
Any person living in Canada, has a constitutional right to take up residence in any of Canada's provinces or territories. By strict letter of the law, ownership of property in Quebec, would make a person a resident of Quebec.
Again, please provide sufficient detail when relating a story of such dubious subject matter.
Simple, read today's Globe and its letter section. If you find the scribe to be a liar write the Globe and say so. I'm just the messenger.
I'll put my former concern in short sentences so that even you can understand it: Quebec protects its past, its language, culture, traditions and institutions. Ontario, being the chief English founding province, does not. Canada has embraced multiculturalism. This won't harm Quebec's ability to protect its roots. Ontario will evolve and eventually no culture will be viewed as dominant. In the end whatever remains of the Old Canada will exist foremost in Quebec. It is cavalier to think - beyond the English language - that anything substantive of Canada's other founding nation will survive.
Are those sentences still too long?
I'll put my former concern in short sentences so that even you can understand it: Quebec protects its past, its language, culture, traditions and institutions. Ontario, being the chief English founding province, does not. Canada has embraced multiculturalism. This won't harm Quebec's ability to protect its roots. Ontario will evolve and eventually no culture will be viewed as dominant. In the end whatever remains of the Old Canada will exist foremost in Quebec. It is cavalier to think - beyond the English language - that anything substantive of Canada's other founding nation will survive.
Are those sentences still too long?
Question?
How on earth do you justify wanting to seperate when your province requires transfer payments to substain the standard of living????????????
How on earth do you justify wanting to seperate when your province requires transfer payments to substain the standard of living????????????
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
Canada has embraced multicuturalism? Yes. You have that right. You are a smart person.
Okay, but let's get back to the subject at hand. Officially, Canada is a bilingual country. We have two official languages: English and French. How do we know that we have two official languages? Well, we could read the newspapers, and they might tell us. Or we could look at our constitution and see that, yes, Virginia, we do have two official languages.
While Canada may very well be multicultural, we are officially a bilingual country comprised of two founding cultures: the English and the French. As you may have read in the newspapers, or not, the vast majority of Canadians are English speaking, and a small minority of Canadians are French speaking.
Canada has no constitutional obligation to protect the language rights of the Dutch, for example. The Dutch are free to speak their native tongue while in Canada, but they have no right to expect Canada or Canadians to make any effort to communicate with them in their mother tongue. In choosing to come to Canada, immigrants that do not speak English or French, are expected to learn to communicate in either of the two official languages. As a result of this expectation, and the reality that most Canadians speak English, it can be reasonably expected that immigrants to this country will learn the English language. Consequently, the English language in Canada is at very little risk of erosion due to Canada's multicultural position. The reverse, with regard to the minority French speaking population, does not hold true.
Again, to reiterate, the risk to the French language, is not Canada's mulicultural growth, but the mere fact that the vast majority of Canadians either speak English, or learn to speak English in lieu of the French language.
So why are the French Canadians so concerned? Think about it! Why is there a risk to French culture and language? Think about it! Why do French Canadians have the right to be concerned? Okay, I'll tell you. It's because the constitution says that they have every right to be concerned.
Ya know, you remind me of some of the people that live in this town. They haven't the foggiest, and no amount of light will see them through to the other side.
tamarin said:
Canada has embraced multicuturalism? Yes. You have that right. You are a smart person.
Okay, but let's get back to the subject at hand. Officially, Canada is a bilingual country. We have two official languages: English and French. How do we know that we have two official languages? Well, we could read the newspapers, and they might tell us. Or we could look at our constitution and see that, yes, Virginia, we do have two official languages.
While Canada may very well be multicultural, we are officially a bilingual country comprised of two founding cultures: the English and the French. As you may have read in the newspapers, or not, the vast majority of Canadians are English speaking, and a small minority of Canadians are French speaking.
Canada has no constitutional obligation to protect the language rights of the Dutch, for example. The Dutch are free to speak their native tongue while in Canada, but they have no right to expect Canada or Canadians to make any effort to communicate with them in their mother tongue. In choosing to come to Canada, immigrants that do not speak English or French, are expected to learn to communicate in either of the two official languages. As a result of this expectation, and the reality that most Canadians speak English, it can be reasonably expected that immigrants to this country will learn the English language. Consequently, the English language in Canada is at very little risk of erosion due to Canada's multicultural position. The reverse, with regard to the minority French speaking population, does not hold true.
Again, to reiterate, the risk to the French language, is not Canada's mulicultural growth, but the mere fact that the vast majority of Canadians either speak English, or learn to speak English in lieu of the French language.
So why are the French Canadians so concerned? Think about it! Why is there a risk to French culture and language? Think about it! Why do French Canadians have the right to be concerned? Okay, I'll tell you. It's because the constitution says that they have every right to be concerned.
Ya know, you remind me of some of the people that live in this town. They haven't the foggiest, and no amount of light will see them through to the other side.
And you think some of your townfolk are foggy? Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! You haven't answered the thrust of my last post. You've not addressed the matter of cultural integrity I've posited. The persistence of the English language is NOT in dispute. Simply stated, again: will a future Canada be equally sympathetic to the nation's two founding cultures? Or find that only one, because it was nurtured and protected, survived in any recognizable form?
This 'discussion' is becoming a waste of time.
This 'discussion' is becoming a waste of time.
Quebecers, for the most part, don't give a horse's ass about offical bilingualism. Bilinguilism is the 'feel good' answer of English speaking federalists. Quebecers don't have an identity crisis and know they are a unique people and a nation. 99% of Quebecers don't care that someone can attend a French speaking school in Alberta or there are 'official' bilingual signs at a National Park in B.C. It's irrelevent to them. A non-issue. The issue that matters is that the French language is dominant in Quebec and will continue to be dominant into the future.
Re: RE: Support for Seperatists down
I'm going to try to explain this to you without hurling insults. But before I do that, I want to check on a few things.
First, I want to check the title and subject of this thread. Maybe I got it all wrong. So let's see. The title of the thread is "Support for separatists down."
Okay, I got that much right. I wasn't just imagining that this thread was about separatist support. Man, it feels good to be awake.
Second, I want to take a quick peek through my window at the outside world and see who these separatists are. I know from the original post, that this thread is about Quebec separatists. I know from common sense that the separatists are the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc Quebecois, as well as some of the people that support these two parties. And before you go off half-cocked about non-separatists supporting the PQ and BQ, I want to point out that I said "some" of the supporters of these two parties are separatists. Man, it feels good to be awake.
Third, I want to give myself a little pinch and see if I fully understand why some French Quebecers want to separate from Canada. I think, and call me naive if you want, that some people in Quebec believe that their French culture and language is under attack by a predominantly English speaking country. I think, and call me crazy if you want, that immigrants to Canada would rather learn English and not French. I think, and call me stupid if you want, that Canada can only grow through immigration, and that an influx of immigrants to Canada will further erode the francophone population in Canada.
Now you go off on some totally irrelevant diatribe on how the "persistence of English" is not in dispute. The issue here is not whether the English language can survive in Canada, the issue is whether or not the French language can survive.
Now, I'll answer your question. You asked: Will the future Canada be as sympathetic to the two founding cultures?
The answer: NO!
Why?
Because English will continue to thrive in Canada, regardless of any large scale influx of non-English speaking immigrants. The immigrants will continue to speak their native tongue when able, and they will speak English at all other times.
French? Ah, the minority French language will be virtually obliterated. Why? Because immigrants will not want to learn the French language. Very few Canadians speak French, and there will be the necessity for immigrants to conform to the lowest common denominator. The lowest common denominator, of course, being the English language.
So what are the poor French people to do?
Simple! They say "Phuck you!" and they form their own country, with their own language, culture, traditions, and laws.
PLEASE, for the love of Christ, what is the point that you're trying to make? Or are you just farting away, and hoping that someone buys into your absolute nonsense?
tamarin said:
I'm going to try to explain this to you without hurling insults. But before I do that, I want to check on a few things.
First, I want to check the title and subject of this thread. Maybe I got it all wrong. So let's see. The title of the thread is "Support for separatists down."
Okay, I got that much right. I wasn't just imagining that this thread was about separatist support. Man, it feels good to be awake.
Second, I want to take a quick peek through my window at the outside world and see who these separatists are. I know from the original post, that this thread is about Quebec separatists. I know from common sense that the separatists are the Parti Quebecois and the Bloc Quebecois, as well as some of the people that support these two parties. And before you go off half-cocked about non-separatists supporting the PQ and BQ, I want to point out that I said "some" of the supporters of these two parties are separatists. Man, it feels good to be awake.
Third, I want to give myself a little pinch and see if I fully understand why some French Quebecers want to separate from Canada. I think, and call me naive if you want, that some people in Quebec believe that their French culture and language is under attack by a predominantly English speaking country. I think, and call me crazy if you want, that immigrants to Canada would rather learn English and not French. I think, and call me stupid if you want, that Canada can only grow through immigration, and that an influx of immigrants to Canada will further erode the francophone population in Canada.
Now you go off on some totally irrelevant diatribe on how the "persistence of English" is not in dispute. The issue here is not whether the English language can survive in Canada, the issue is whether or not the French language can survive.
Now, I'll answer your question. You asked: Will the future Canada be as sympathetic to the two founding cultures?
The answer: NO!
Why?
Because English will continue to thrive in Canada, regardless of any large scale influx of non-English speaking immigrants. The immigrants will continue to speak their native tongue when able, and they will speak English at all other times.
French? Ah, the minority French language will be virtually obliterated. Why? Because immigrants will not want to learn the French language. Very few Canadians speak French, and there will be the necessity for immigrants to conform to the lowest common denominator. The lowest common denominator, of course, being the English language.
So what are the poor French people to do?
Simple! They say "Phuck you!" and they form their own country, with their own language, culture, traditions, and laws.
PLEASE, for the love of Christ, what is the point that you're trying to make? Or are you just farting away, and hoping that someone buys into your absolute nonsense?