Ok, now i really hope that this thread doesn't get anybody heated, because i understand there are a lot of French Canadians who are members here. In fact my great grandfather was a French Canadian.

Well anyways, heres my question. What is everyones opinion on Quebec? Should it be allowed to become an independent nation? Dose it have the resources to remain a leading power on its own with out Canada? How would Canada fend with the loss of this province? How would America be affected? How would North American Trade be affected? All opinions are welcome :) .

Originally posted by RenegadeXH
Ok, now i really hope that this thread doesn't get anybody heated

Horsesh*t

I have always been of the opinion that if Quebec votes a majority in favor of independence through a referendum, Canada would compromise it's democratic integrity to force them to stay.

Obviously, it's not as simple as "we voted yes, so when do get it?". What would happen with all the English-speaking people in, say, Montreal, for instance?

I have been to Quebec many times. I have family living outside of Montreal. I like the French. I find it rather amusinbg that those people who dislike Quebecers the most, those who think they are just a huge pain in the ass, are the most adamant that they are an integral part of Canada and shouldn't get special priveledges and shouldn't be allowed to go.

My only real beef is that referendums are expensive, but other than that, I want to repeat: If Quebec votes for independence, then who are we to stop them? Democracy in action. It sucks when it doesn't go your way. Duh.

And I can't really blame the French for wanting to go. Yes, they are full Canadians who have all the same rights and freedoms as the rest of us, but let's say Montcalm beat Wolfe, and the British colonies were turned over to France, I'd still feel like my home was "occupied", even after all these years.

I have to give America credit: They took French and Spanish colonies, and successfully absorbed them into an "American" identity. I don't know why Canada never could.

EDIT: Actually, I think in large part, it's because Canada remained so connected to the British (i.e. being included in the wars) while America obviously didn't.

This is really an old thread, why don't you read
and restart the Quebecois thread.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18873

Why does Quebec want independence I thought just like the Union of Scotland and England the agreement guarantees freedom and non persecution from protestants and from the English speakers.

I met some Canadians in Cuba from Quebec (a bit of tongue twister there) who were positively weird. They were very unsocialble and generally didn't leave there parents for a minute. I met a English speaking Canadian (though from China) they were normal. Maybe its just that Quebecians are too unfriendly too remain apart of Canada.

Also, how would a independent Quebec effect France. Would Quebec join France's commonwealth (I'm not sure what its could but they have similar thing to Britain) or would they still remain a part of the British Commonwealth [yes, i understand its not called that anymore]. Would it increase France's tiny influence in the Americas or would Quebec simply ignore its cultural linguistical [I bet your impressed with my spelling] comrades. What kind of foreign policy would an independent Quebec follow?

I understand that Quebecians were on the most advent supporters for Canada's involvement in the First and Second World War. [Thanks for Quebec]. Is this true?

civ3 culture flipping?

Originally posted by redtom
Why does Quebec want independence I thought just like the Union of Scotland and England the agreement guarantees freedom and non persecution from protestants and from the English speakers.

I understand that Quebecians were on the most advent supporters for Canada's involvement in the First and Second World War. [Thanks for Quebec]. Is this true?

Three comments, on this post and on the thread in general:

#1 - there is already a "Quebec independancy" thread going on this forum, isn't this a bit much?

#2 - Yeah, Quebec is very autonomous, more so than Scotland. But why do they want more? Because, as you will soon learn with Scotland, that's what nationalists do; they ask for more. (And in Quebec's case, I can see some reasons to give it to them; not quite so in Scotland, and I'm half Scot by descent)

#3 - I assume you mean "ardent," as in "I understand that Quebecians were the strongest supporters for Canada's involvement in the First and Second World War."

If that's what you meant, sorry you were misinformed. Quebecers in general are very isolationist, and Quebec was for the most part OPPOSED to participation in either "English" war, so much so that the rules for conscription were different for Quebecers as a way of buying them off so they wouldn't break up the country over the war effort(s). While indifference to Europe's fate was the majority view, however, there were still large numbers of francophone Canadians who served in either war; the legendary "Vandoo" regiment (e.g. Vignt douze or Royal 22nd Regiment, forgive my french spelling) is one notable example.

And Quebecer or Quebecois are perfectly acceptable usages; I'm from BC and prefer to be called British Columbian; people from even the most federalist provinces (e.g. Manitoba) long ago stopped worrying about calling Quebecers "Canadians from Quebec," it's just pointless.

R.III

Originally posted by redtom
I met some Canadians in Cuba from Quebec (a bit of tongue twister there) who were positively weird. They were very unsocialble and generally didn't leave there parents for a minute. I met a English speaking Canadian (though from China) they were normal. Maybe its just that Quebecians are too unfriendly too remain apart of Canada.

It's hard to keep a conversation in english when you speak french for a common quebecer... but there are unsociable people everywhere maybe you were not lucky :)

Pesrsonally, I think Quebec has too many politcal implications.

First, It would subdivide the Reast of mainland Canda from Atlantic Canda.

Second: The way they're going about this is idiotic. Esentially, they beg the government to pay them to separate.

Third: The US wouldn't recognize them without Candian support, unless it was a perfect referendum, which probalby aint gonna happen.

fourth: Nobady would trade with them. They would be desparate for money, so prices for Quebecois goods would be higher. Nobody would trade with tthem, the economy would colapse.

Fifth: They dont have anybody to lead them.p The party quebecois has no real leader anymore, and has almost dropped off the political stage, execpt for "This Hour has 22 minutes", and "Royal Candian Air Farce".

Sixth: They have no real goal, except for soverienty. If they got it, they would probably never no what to do next.

Seventh: ALot of Quebecois workers are English. They'de probably leave Quebec if it separated. So the work force would colapse.


Thats all I can think of right now, I'll be back though.

First, It would subdivide the Reast of mainland Canda from Atlantic Canda.
That's not actually a problem for us :D

Second: The way they're going about this is idiotic. Esentially, they beg the government to pay them to separate.
What do you mean? I'm not paid because I want to secede! :confused:

Third: The US wouldn't recognize them without Candian support, unless it was a perfect referendum, which probalby aint gonna happen.
If it is more than 50% they will... Majority is the key in democracy and USA protect democracy...

fourth: Nobady would trade with them. They would be desparate for money, so prices for Quebecois goods would be higher. Nobody would trade with tthem, the economy would colapse.
Nobody will trade with us? Where did you find these thing... We're not Cuba lol :D

Fifth: They dont have anybody to lead them.p The party quebecois has no real leader anymore, and has almost dropped off the political stage, execpt for "This Hour has 22 minutes", and "Royal Candian Air Farce".
Leaders come with time... There are a lot of countries that lack of real leaders but they are doing great anyway... "This Hour has 22 minutes", and "Royal Candian Air Farce": What?! I don't understand what you mean...

Sixth: They have no real goal, except for soverienty. If they got it, they would probably never no what to do next.
LOL, we'll just do nothing unless there is something that need to be changed ;)

Seventh: ALot of Quebecois workers are English. They'de probably leave Quebec if it separated. So the work force would colapse.
Oh well, if they wish to leave so unemployed persons (something like 10% of the working force) will find a job :)

Thats all I can think of right now, I'll be back though.
And I'll be there :crazyeye:

First off, to inforrm my fellow Québécois Frosti that This Hours has 22 minutes and Royal Canadian Air Farce are Canadian humor shows. I believe the first were behind that famous petition to get a referendum to force Stockwell Day, should he be elected, to change his name to Doris Day, based on his promise to have a referendum if a petition of over 100 000 names was handed to the govt for anything.

Last I checked they had far more than their 100 000 requirement. Just too bad Day didn't get elected >=).

Anyway, back on track, to answer your questions in turn

"Well anyways, heres my question. What is everyones opinion on Quebec?"

If you mean the matter of Québec's independance, absolute "who cares"ism. It is about the opinion of most of the province of Québec, which explains why the Parti Québécois is being hit so hard in the partial elections to replace resigning representatives). They still can't get off their high horse about making Québec independant, and the most of the rest of us are just plain getting bored of hearing about it once every two weeks.

Down with Landry! Bring back Bouchard! He knew how to let that idea not be mentioned too much.

"Should it be allowed to become an independent nation?"

If a majority of the population vote in support of the notion, then the Canadian government should negociate with them on finding appropriate terms for separation. While it is not stated anywhere that provinces are allowed to leave the federation, it would be unreasonable to try to hold on - and against the idea of democracy. If a majority of inhabitants from a territorial entity part of a larger one no longer wishes to be part of the larger one, then trying to ignore their wish and force them to stay in is the kind of thing Milosevic and the like would be known for (of course they actually went and used violence).

"Dose it have the resources to remain a leading power on its own with out Canada?"

Perhaps not a leading power ; but an independant Québec could probably make-do not too badly. There would have to be changes, of course, and certain of them would be hurtful, but Québec isn't exactly a resource-poor province.

"How would Canada fend with the loss of this province?"

Aside from the already mentioned breach between the atlantic provinces and the mainland Canada, it probably wouldn't affect them so much ; especially if a reasonable form of economical partnership was developed, something which the very powerful Ontario is almost certain to push for, given their economical interest in trade with Québec.

"How would America be affected?"

America proper would be little affected, unless either side pushed it down from political niceties into open civil war. How America is affected is really up to Canada, though - if they play fair in the negociations and try to keep things stable in North America, there would be no realy effect on the US of A. On the other hand, if they play dirty, the effect may hardly be as nice.

"How would North American Trade be affected?"

It depend on a number of factor, especially how the split is made. If it includes guarantees for trade without border import rates wars, it probably would affect little. This would be especially true if America quickly and efficiently negociated including Québec in the major trade agreements of North America. Again, all this is dependant on how Canada and the US choses to play their cards.

With Jean Chrétien as Prime Minister, I wouldn't be too optimist about it.

"Obviously, it's not as simple as "we voted yes, so when do get it?". What would happen with all the English-speaking people in, say, Montreal, for instance? "

They would be allowed to do as they please. I'd say they'd still be allowed to learn their language in school (as first language), and since everyone learns it and it is the "world language" at present, well, there's no real problem of them no longer being part. Of course should they wish to leave, they would be allowed too, but I would be extremely surprised if things becamse all that worse for the English Québecers than they are now - and they aren't bad, in general opinion.

The only people complaining about the situation fo the english québecers are those who look in Ontario and are jealous that they can't control nearly everything there as the english people do there. Of course they don't realize that they are far better off than the French in Ontario and Acadia, but heh. Imbeciles are everywhere.

"I met some Canadians in Cuba from Quebec (a bit of tongue twister there) who were positively weird. They were very unsocialble and generally didn't leave there parents for a minute. I met a English speaking Canadian (though from China) they were normal. Maybe its just that Quebecians are too unfriendly too remain apart of Canada. "

WTF? Maybe it has to do with them not speaking english, especially if they were kids? As for not leving their parents, well, *shrugs* It happens. Not everyone is a social animal - there are people like that in every society in the world.

Too unfriendly to remain a part of Canada? That sounds like an open insult to all Québecers out here...Frankly, if you base your opionions of Québec on one little encounter with Québecers, that's rather pathetic.

"What kind of foreign policy would an independent Quebec follow? "

Closer ties with France are a given. However, while we might leave the Commonwealth, we certainly wouldn't sever all ties with it, and would of course be friendly to our massive southern Neighbor we all know and love. We'd also probably try to maintain strong economic ties with the rest of Canada.

"I understand that Quebecians were on the most advent supporters for Canada's involvement in the First and Second World War. [Thanks for Quebec]. Is this true?"

Involvement in the war, not really - they didn't really go out to protest against it, but they didn't go out to support it. They just weren'T really interested either way - though not to the US of A point of not interested. What they did get out to protest against in both case was conscription. Québec as a whole did not want to go out there to let themselves be butchered as Cannon fodder in a british war. (as both were seen ; there wasn't all that much love for France until Charles de Gaule shot off his famous comment, given that they had abandoned us way back).

For the record, while I would visit an independent Quebec as often as I could and wish you guys all the best, on a straight financial level, Ontario has zero interest in trading with an independent Quebec, or a Canadian Quebec. Almost all Ontario trade (90%) is now north-south, and most of our trade with Quebec consists of your construction workers working in our province while Quebec laws effectively ban our construction workers from working on Quebec jobsites.

Hence Mike Harris' infamous "Fairness is a Two-Way Street Act," which, if successful, will mean that the only remaining trade of significance other than billions in transfer payments will be Johnny Olsen crossing the river from his home in Nepean to drink underage in the fine, fine bars of Hull and bring home a cold beer from the depanneur.

Oda tu viens de quelle ville au fait?

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
"How would America be affected?"

America proper would be little affected, unless either side pushed it down from political niceties into open civil war. How America is affected is really up to Canada, though - if they play fair in the negociations and try to keep things stable in North America, there would be no realy effect on the US of A. On the other hand, if they play dirty, the effect may hardly be as nice.

Ah, but with Quebec independent, might not the United States seek to "integrate" English speaking Canada as states 51 through 54? After all, through much of its early history, the U.S. has always coveted its northern neighbor.

When it comes to Quebec, I always think of Brendan Behan's quote to the effect that: "Montreal is the only city in the world where a good French accent is not considered a social asset"

If Quebec succeeded in gaining independence, I doubt that trade with the United States would suffer. The New England area of the U.S. buys a lot of power from Quebecs hydro plants, and that wouldn't change. I can't imagine Quebec being shut out of NAFTA. However, Quebec would very quickly be drawn into the US economic orbit. It would be a small economy sitting right next to the world's biggest. As part of Canada, Quebec has some clout. On it's own, it would have precious little.

I also think that a united Canada would not long survive the loss of Quebec. I could see Canada probably fracturing, with Ontario possibly remaining an independent nation, but with the rest of Canada eventually joining the United States.

I don't think so.Canadians are proud of not being american,more peaceful,not imperialists supporting some dictatorships in the 3rd world,socialists,bound with the mother country etc....
As i said in other threads about Quebec,i think it's bad that many Quebecers wanna secede.While they focus on the secession,they don't focus on other issues(isn't it benefitial for the govt?).

Y do they wanna secede?It's said that Anglos fought n expelled Quebecers n called Quebecers "white negers" n broadcast a "Speak white,speak english"propaganda.It's said that Brits considered all the people not speakin english(even whites) as inferior.They raised taxes on Quebecers for the Canada Pacific(railroads) n settled Anglos in the West.After the american independance,loyalists settled in New-Brunswick n Nova-Scotia n expelled Acadians.They settled in Newfoundland too.
But what now?Do 24 million english-speaking canadians c Quebecers as second-class citizens?
40% of the Canadians are of British descent,27% of french descent,6%of german descent,14%of other euro.descent,10%asian,3%Amerindians.Yet,20% only speak french.It means that even if all the immigrants who ever entered Canada were taught english,more than1/4 of the French-speakers would've let down french for english.
Is there still a risk of assimilation?In the 80's,english was forbidden in Quebec,which upset english-speakers of course.

Originally posted by Switch625
If Quebec succeeded in gaining independence, I doubt that trade with the United States would suffer. The New England area of the U.S. buys a lot of power from Quebec's hydro plants, and that wouldn't change. I can't imagine Quebec being shut out of NAFTA. However, Quebec would very quickly be drawn into the US economic orbit. It would be a small economy sitting right next to the world's biggest. As part of Canada, Quebec has some clout. On it's own, it would have precious little.

I also think that a united Canada would not long survive the loss of Quebec. I could see Canada probably fracturing, with Ontario possibly remaining an independent nation, but with the rest of Canada eventually joining the United States.

Out of all the posts here I agree with this the most.

For comparison I consider what happened with the former
British Caribbean islands left after 1945. When Britain decided it was no longer interested in maintaining colonial rule; the islands had the opportunity of forming an english speaking caribbean confederation; but the smaller islands did not want to be
dominated by the large islands so a large number of micro
states were created. The US regards the caribbean as its backyard and effectively controls them all (remember the
invasion of Grenada). There are a lot of people pretending to
be presidents and cabinet ministers etc in these micro states.
But in my view; their people would be much better off if they were actually part of the US and could therefore travel in the US and vote for US congressman, senator and president.

In my view if Quebec left Canada, the same thing would happen to Canada. As Canada is bigger; it might take 50 years rather than 20 years. Ultimately the Canadian provinces would be
faced with a hard choice of (a) maintaining minimal independence for local issues (e.g. gun control and liquor laws) but being otherwise entirely subject to US companies and US foreign policy and having no democratic input to US foreign policy at all or (b) seek admittance as American states to secure US voting rights. This would apply equally to Quebec and the English speaking parts of Canada.

And by the way, I think that the US would be much less
sympathetic to French speakers than Canada is.

Ehat would happen to Canada East of Quebec?

They'd need to negociate a nice trade deal with Québec t be sure they can get everything through to Canada ;)

As for the why some people in Québec (I personally don't give a damn either way), here are a few excerpts of a canadian newspaper I caught sight of at work (The Globe and Mail). I'm trying to remember them, so they may not be 100% accurate, but they are in the general feeling.

Title along the line of "Québec is no longer the chimney of the nation."

"Québec has lost another sign of its uniqueness, no longer being the part of the nation with the highest rate of smokers"
"While smokign was frowned upon in north america, Gallic insouciance allowed it to continue unhindered in Québec"
"The very recent* shift against smoking in Québec is like an earthquake..."

*actually quite a few years old - laws against smoking in public building were voted back in the nineties, not in the last two years as this article seems to say. And how strange I noticed no earthquake...

The article went on, filled with dripping sarcasm against Québec. I'm sorry, but when a major canadian newspaper has a PAGE ONE article along those line, I sure as heck can understand why some Québecers wants to be apart from Canada. Heck, reading it quite nearly tipped me out of neutrality.

I don't want to pee in anyones pool, but shouldn't this really be in Off-Topic?

Get out of my pool!

no because SKILORD never reads those, he likes this discussion.

An Independant Qubec could work if poperly managed, maybe even prosper, but it most likely will not receive the good leadership it needs. But I personally have no problem with Quebec becoming indepedant, but I would see it neccesary to move the Nations capital somewhere else possible (thought highly unlikely) Well anyways as long as I can go to Hull and buy beer there I'm fine with an indepedant Quebec.
I personally thought the Charlles De Gaul speech was really galvinizing, i'm surprised it's not talked about more

Originally posted by Switch625
If Quebec succeeded in gaining independence, I doubt that trade with the United States would suffer. The New England area of the U.S. buys a lot of power from Quebecs hydro plants, and that wouldn't change. I can't imagine Quebec being shut out of NAFTA. However, Quebec would very quickly be drawn into the US economic orbit. It would be a small economy sitting right next to the world's biggest. As part of Canada, Quebec has some clout. On it's own, it would have precious little.

I also think that a united Canada would not long survive the loss of Quebec. I could see Canada probably fracturing, with Ontario possibly remaining an independent nation, but with the rest of Canada eventually joining the United States.

I would seriously doubt this. I am not to knowledgable about the Quebec situation, although I did talk to soda for a little while in chat about it. Why would the US want to accept the rest of Canada into its nation?? North-American de-stability is kind of a scary thought to most Americans. I personally don't think that it will happen. The US wouldn't recognize Quebec, and even if they did, I don't think that the rest of Canada would join the US.

If Quebec gained it's independence from Canada, officially recognized by Canada and all that, what reason would the U.S. have for withholding recognition of the new state? That's not our style.

North-American de-stability is kind of a scary thought to most Americans.

Absolutely. That's why I believe the U.S. would be willing to admit the hypothetical fragments of Canada to the union. Far better to go through the pain of absorbing new territory than to have to deal with a collection of weak and potentially unstable states in our backyard.

Originally posted by redtom
Why does Quebec want independence I thought just like the Union of Scotland and England the agreement guarantees freedom and non persecution from protestants and from the English speakers.

I met some Canadians in Cuba from Quebec (a bit of tongue twister there) who were positively weird. They were very unsocialble and generally didn't leave there parents for a minute. I met a English speaking Canadian (though from China) they were normal. Maybe its just that Quebecians are too unfriendly too remain apart of Canada.

That is a pretty small sample huh? That is like meeting a communist in San Francisco, and suggesting that Americans are against the idea of free enterprise. Montreal is one of the most open cities in the world.

Truth be told, I met a guy from England once, and he was a little strange (5 foot 4, kind of a weiner) so nnow I am going to assume that the English are a bunch of whiny little weaklings who don't do anything but drink homogenized milk and go to bed a 7:30

Originally posted by FrosTi

That's not actually a problem for us :D


What do you mean? I'm not paid because I want to secede! :confused:


If it is more than 50% they will... Majority is the key in democracy and USA protect democracy...

Quebec cleverly uses the separation thing to suck money into the province (hey why not play the card if you have it.)

AS for the Americans, do you mean they will protect democracy the way they did in Chile, and the rest of South America over the last 50 years?

Originally posted by Andu Indorin


Ah, but with Quebec independent, might not the United States seek to "integrate" English speaking Canada as states 51 through 54? After all, through much of its early history, the U.S. has always coveted its northern neighbor.

Try 51-59, and lets not forget the territories.

Originally posted by Switch625
If Quebec succeeded in gaining independence, I doubt that trade with the United States would suffer. The New England area of the U.S. buys a lot of power from Quebecs hydro plants, and that wouldn't change. I can't imagine Quebec being shut out of NAFTA. However, Quebec would very quickly be drawn into the US economic orbit. It would be a small economy sitting right next to the world's biggest. As part of Canada, Quebec has some clout. On it's own, it would have precious little.

I also think that a united Canada would not long survive the loss of Quebec. I could see Canada probably fracturing, with Ontario possibly remaining an independent nation, but with the rest of Canada eventually joining the United States.

You forget something. 95% of Canadians anywhere don't WANT to be Americans. Really, don't flatter yourselves.

As a French U.S. citizen, I would support Quebec leavbing Canada. It should be independent. If Quebec ever becomes independent, I will support it.

Originally posted by Damien
I don't think so.Canadians are proud of not being american,more peaceful,not imperialists supporting some dictatorships in the 3rd world,socialists,bound with the mother country etc....
As i said in other threads about Quebec,i think it's bad that many Quebecers wanna secede.While they focus on the secession,they don't focus on other issues(isn't it benefitial for the govt?).

Y do they wanna secede?It's said that Anglos fought n expelled Quebecers n called Quebecers "white negers" n broadcast a "Speak white,speak english"propaganda.It's said that Brits considered all the people not speakin english(even whites) as inferior.They raised taxes on Quebecers for the Canada Pacific(railroads) n settled Anglos in the West.After the american independance,loyalists settled in New-Brunswick n Nova-Scotia n expelled Acadians.They settled in Newfoundland too.
But what now?Do 24 million english-speaking canadians c Quebecers as second-class citizens?
40% of the Canadians are of British descent,27% of french descent,6%of german descent,14%of other euro.descent,10%asian,3%Amerindians.Yet,20% only speak french.It means that even if all the immigrants who ever entered Canada were taught english,more than1/4 of the French-speakers would've let down french for english.
Is there still a risk of assimilation?In the 80's,english was forbidden in Quebec,which upset english-speakers of course.

People in non-Canadian countries are funny when they try to understand the political situations. Things are never that heated here in terms of French-English anymore. Canadians are too mellow, and our history isn't long enough to have had bloodly civil unrest and revolutions.

When Canadians are talking cultural mosaic they are not just talking french-english, but rather those PLUS Chinese (over 30% of Vancouver's 2 million people.) middle easterners, and pretty much everyone under the sun.

Unless that is what you are saying. I am too tired to think right now:lol: .

Originally posted by Sobieski


You forget something. 95% of Canadians anywhere don't WANT to be Americans. Really, don't flatter yourselves.

Are you sure? I've talked to plenty of Canadians on various internet message boards over the years, and I've gotten the impression that if Quebec goes independent, the rest of you culture flipping to the US is a distinct possibility.

I should add that this is just an opinion born out of the discussions I've had, I don't have any hard evidence to back it up.

Originally posted by Zarn
As a French U.S. citizen, I would support Quebec leavbing Canada. It should be independent. If Quebec ever becomes independent, I will support it.

Don't let guys like this into your country, notice he's French
first and American second. Citzens like this you don't need.

Originally posted by Sobieski


People in non-Canadian countries are funny when they try to understand the political situations. Things are never that heated here in terms of French-English anymore. Canadians are too mellow, and our history isn't long enough to have had bloodly civil unrest and revolutions.

When Canadians are talking cultural mosaic they are not just talking french-english, but rather those PLUS Chinese (over 30% of Vancouver's 2 million people.) middle easterners, and pretty much everyone under the sun.

Unless that is what you are saying. I am too tired to think right now:lol: .

A friend of mine is a quebecer independantist living in Hull and working in Ontario.

He told me about all this and i read Canadian history too.(briefly)

He told me that english-speakers in the East(Ontario,New-Brunswick,Nova Scotia,New-Foundland) are normal but that people in the West are rich and assh*les.

French-speakers are discriminated in the economics he says,told me about many cases in companies and decision centers being moved from Montreal to Toronto.

I know him and know his view is biased but what do you think about it?

A long rant and generalization?the way i tend to see it.

Imagine if nationalism were still alive in western europe.
You guys gotta make great shows inviting the audience of the 2 communities to talk.

Ozz,about French U.S.,this is the english structure:a US citizen of french descent.
It's like in german,it's the opposite structure compared to latin languages.

I'm sure you know it as you're an english-speaker.

Originally posted by Damien
Ozz,about French U.S.,this is the english structure:a US citizen of french descent.
It's like in german,it's the opposite structure compared to latin languages.

I'm sure you know it as you're an english-speaker.
I should of clarified that. Thank you.

Originally posted by Switch625


Are you sure? I've talked to plenty of Canadians on various internet message boards over the years, and I've gotten the impression that if Quebec goes independent, the rest of you culture flipping to the US is a distinct possibility.

I should add that this is just an opinion born out of the discussions I've had, I don't have any hard evidence to back it up.

Many Canadians say that, because they forget that they wouldn't be FORCED to join the states. Besides, why would we want to join a country that has more strict marijuana laws. That is our economic future here;) :lol:

Originally posted by Damien


A friend of mine is a quebecer independantist living in Hull and working in Ontario.

He told me about all this and i read Canadian history too.(briefly)

He told me that english-speakers in the East(Ontario,New-Brunswick,Nova Scotia,New-Foundland) are normal but that people in the West are rich and assh*les.

French-speakers are discriminated in the economics he says,told me about many cases in companies and decision centers being moved from Montreal to Toronto.

I know him and know his view is biased but what do you think about it?

A long rant and generalization?the way i tend to see it.

Imagine if nationalism were still alive in western europe.
You guys gotta make great shows inviting the audience of the 2 communities to talk.

Hahhahah, I am from the heart of the as*holes in western Canada, and most of these people really make me sick, but you also have to understand that it isn't as much a dislike of Quebeckers as a complete ignorance. People out here know so little about what is going on that no one listens to them anyways.:lol:

I do think you should make talk shows about that issue.

The medias are a great power.

Quebec CANNOT seperate. It IS Canada. When I think of Canadian culture I think of Montreal, Just for Laughs, and Celine Dion (shudder). I would really hate to see Quebec leave, although now it probably won't happen. Lots of immigrants in Quebec came to Canada, not to Quebec. They would vote "non" in any referrendum.

That's exactly one of the reproaches invoked by separatists.

They say that immigrants learn english and are against independance whereas french-speaking Quebecers voted yes in 1995.

Are ads and other things written in both languages in other parts of Canada?

How do you explain the french-speaking Quebecers's vote for independance?

I find it quite weird to hear you talking about national references instead of Quebecers.

Quebecer involvment in national references depend on em.

Originally posted by Sobieski


Hahhahah, I am from the heart of the as*holes in western Canada, and most of these people really make me sick, but you also have to understand that it isn't as much a dislike of Quebeckers as a complete ignorance. People out here know so little about what is going on that no one listens to them anyways.:lol:

I'm sure they feel the same way about you.

Originally posted by Zarn

I should of clarified that. Thank you.

I know than you said, It don't matter,
French-American, American-French same B.S.

Originally posted by newfangle
Quebec CANNOT seperate. It IS Canada. When I think of Canadian culture I think of Montreal, Just for Laughs, and Celine Dion (shudder). I would really hate to see Quebec leave, although now it probably won't happen. Lots of immigrants in Quebec came to Canada, not to Quebec. They would vote "non" in any referrendum.

True but most young québecers vote "yes" and most old people vote "no". The more years it pass, the more young men and women are able to vote.

there is a very small chance that Canadian provinves would join the USA. I for one would not go for it. If the american army came over the border to convince the minority that didn't want to after we did join, I for one would be sitting there shooting at them with my hunting rifle, or at least trying. There is enough anti-americanism and canadian pride to make the event of a union highly unlikley

Originally posted by Damien
That's exactly one of the reproaches invoked by separatists.

They say that immigrants learn english and are against independance whereas french-speaking Quebecers voted yes in 1995.

Are ads and other things written in both languages in other parts of Canada?

How do you explain the french-speaking Quebecers's vote for independance?

I find it quite weird to hear you talking about national references instead of Quebecers.

Quebecer involvment in national references depend on em.

Actually new immigrants are forced to learn French in school. Requirements to get into an English school are fairly strict.

Virtually everything you purchace anywhere in Canada has French and English on it.

The vote was at the high point in the separatist movement, not to mention that any non vote (to stay in Canada) that had the slightest thing wrong with it (ie. someone put a cross instead of a check in the voting box) would be thrown out. Since that time separatist sentiments have waned quite a bit. The separatist political parties appear to be dropping off the map federally, and provincially they are stagnant. 9/11 helped a bit too.

The point is that there is a steady flow of immigrants coming to Quebec who will learn French AND English, not to mention their native tongue, and who want to stay in Canada, because that is why they came in the first place. On a side note, whatever form globalization comes in, you can bet that Quebec will be quite competitive, considering all of these cultural assets.

With more immigration, the French language WILL NOT die, because people have to learn it when they move there, and it will be come less and less likely that Quebec will separate.

Originally posted by Ozz


I'm sure they feel the same way about you.

Many people out here in the west shouldn't be allowed opinions. Most of them in Alberta are just hicks with money.

Ok,I hope you guys talk about it and find a solution.

I think the wrong enemy is the language.
It's a social matter between the West and the East.

No language brings a special mentality.

Originally posted by Damien
Ok,I hope you guys talk about it and find a solution.

I think the wrong enemy is the language.
It's a social matter between the West and the East.

No language brings a special mentality.

Social situations in Canada can be much more complicated and isteresting than many people outside the country give it credit for.

One must keep in mind though, that in a country with relatively few social problems compared to others, something like the French-English situation can become exacberated beyond its actual scope, and appear worse than it really is.

Originally posted by Sobieski


Many people out here in the west shouldn't be allowed opinions. Most of them in Alberta are just hicks with money.

Yeah, Their payin' taxes and carryin' the country by producing
real goods with real value. All i see is you bad monthing a bunch
of successful working people without making any sort of point at
all.

You should move to Vancouver or Ottawa were you'd
fit in.

Originally posted by tonberry


True but most young québecers vote "yes" and most old people vote "no". The more years it pass, the more young men and women are able to vote.

Yeah. but their older and wiser by then, and are'nt going
to gamble their children's future as lightly as they would
their own when they were single.

Baseed on the results of the last federal election (lots of Bloc seats replaced by Liberal), I feel it is unlikely for a referedum to take place anytime in the near future.

Originally posted by Ozz


Yeah, Their payin' taxes and carryin' the country by producing
real goods with real value. All i see is you bad monthing a bunch
of successful working people without making any sort of point at
all.

You should move to Vancouver or Ottawa were you'd
fit in.

OH yes that is right successful working people. The same ones that are tearing down the boreal forest in Alberta, and the same ones who allow there to be thousands of homeless in Calgary and Edmonton, in one of the richest places on Earth. Having your money earn yourself more money isn't what I would consider hardwork.

Yes I think I would fit in, but I deserve to be in Alberta's natural rugged beauty as much as all the people who want to destroy it for a quick buck.

Alberta doesn't produce goods. We harvest Texas Tea and liquidate it to the States for practically nothing.

Originally posted by Sobieski


OH yes that is right successful working people. The same ones that are tearing down the boreal forest in Alberta, and the same ones who allow there to be thousands of homeless in Calgary and Edmonton, in one of the richest places on Earth. Having your money earn yourself more money isn't what I would consider hardwork.

Yes I think I would fit in, but I deserve to be in Alberta's natural rugged beauty as much as all the people who want to destroy it for a quick buck.

You honestly don't think the CEOs and Major Shareholders
live in Alberta do you? The real problems you relate are
worldwide, don't just blame Albertans, Ottawa deserves
a large measure of credit for selling out the people of
Canada to the major Corporations.

The real problem is the butcher, the baker and the candlestick
maker don't know how to get these leechs off their backs.

Originally posted by Ozz


You honestly don't think the CEOs and Major Shareholders
live in Alberta do you? The real problems you relate are
worldwide, don't just blame Albertans, Ottawa deserves
a large measure of credit for selling out the people of
Canada to the major Corporations.

The real problem is the butcher, the baker and the candlestick
maker don't know how to get these leechs off their backs.

I know the federal government does, but I am not talking about policy, I am talking about the attitude of the people in Alberta, and besides a lot of what Ottawa does has to do with pressure from Alberta. Jean gets along a lot better with Ralph than many people think.

But yet again I am not talking about the politics of the governments but of the people of Alberta.

What are you guys doing?

This is suppose to be a heated debate about an independent Quebec!

Originally posted by Damien

A friend of mine is a quebecer independantist living in Hull and working in Ontario.
He told me about all this and i read Canadian history too.(briefly)
He told me that english-speakers in the East(Ontario,New-Brunswick,Nova Scotia,New-Foundland) are normal but that people in the West are rich and assh*les.

He maybe as ignorant as those westerner's of whom he claims to be ignorant. :D

I find often, those who claim others to have flaws in their character to be 'passing-off' those very flaws in their own character upon others.

French-speakers are discriminated in the economics he says,told me about many cases in companies and decision centers being moved from Montreal to Toronto.

French speakers are not exactly discriminated against in the economics of Canada. Economic opportunities are naturally greater in the majority language in the entirety of North America. A Head Office location in Toronto greater facilitates trade across the real US:Canada border. The decision has not as much to do with the 'fictitious' Quebec:Rest of Canada border.

In his defence, in the hey-day of independence, many national corporations did make the move from Quebec to Ontario.

However, the relocation was a result of the independence movement. Therefore the argument he presents is at least a little circular: We scared (nation-wide corporations) into thinking that Quebec may leave Canada. Well they uhm... heard us loud and clear, and ran like cowards! Therefore Quebec is discriminated against economically. Ask Boeing (at least i think Boeing is in WA) if it would have remained in Washington if the State of Washington was contemplating seperation from the Rest of United States?! :lol:
Corporations, like many other entities, seek stability.

It would help Quebec's economic grievances if Quebec stopped threatening seperation.

I know him and know his view is biased but what do you think about it?
It is 'fairly' biased. As opposed to totally unfair. :D

A long rant and generalization?the way i tend to see it.

Imagine if nationalism were still alive in western europe.
You guys gotta make great shows inviting the audience of the 2 communities to talk.

As sobieski has indicated - Canada is a nation with (relatively speaking) few major social problems. It becomes easy to make, as they say, "mountains out of mole hills". I think the Rest of the World, as opposed to claims of the Rest of Canada, laughs at how big a mountain has been created from this mole hill.

Just some random thoughts from an assh*le in the west. :D

Na, I don't know....he told me that Quebecers were called 'White NEGERS" in the past and that an assimilation campaign"Speak white,speak english" was performed.

Moreover,as Canada was part of the British Empire,english speakers became the overwhelming majority and settled in the west.

Originally posted by muppet
What are you guys doing?

This is suppose to be a heated debate about an independent Quebec!

That occurs in thread after thread, the separtist start one,
but everyone here knows enough history to see it's just
propaganda they're spreading. They soon abandon the
thread/forum search of greener pastures.

I have yet to see one new fact in a Quebec thread.
Sorry pretty much a dead issue. I just post to Quebec
thread cause I don't like separtists bad mouthing me
and my country in an international forum without
showing with logic/facts what a bunch of liars they are.

Where as Alberta has real issues.

*laughs out loud*

And just as some separatists shows the bad side of Québec, Ozz shows the bad side of Alberta.

"Séparatists are whiney little liars that don't know a thing about history and that I'll prove them wrong and..."

Sorry to tell you Ozz, but while the CURRENT SITUATION don't leave as much room for grievance as there was in the past (there's still plenty, from all sides of Canada), historicaly Québec DOES have plenty of room for grievance, due to constantly being forced to do what the RoC wanted them to (Conscription), being forced in with the rest of Canada, being (until the 60s) constantly seen as "White negers" (if you studied Québec history instead of sitting in your ivory tower of alberta, you'd know about that) of sort, etc.

Alberta has its own issues with the federal government - but they do not have the same historical or cultural roots as the separatist movements, though they'd tend to have stronger economical ones. You guys weren't systematicaly used as a (barely) paid labor that was good for nothing else by the rich english families of Montréal for the better part of a two centuries, after all.

The wise speaks only of what they know Ozz. You obviously don't know much about Québec history to make that kind of bland stupid statements such as the fact that separatist only spew forth propaganda without any basis in fact to badmouth canada.

That said, the main difference AT PRESENT between Canada and Québec is cultural even more so than linguistic. Canada - especially west of Ontario - is a very conservative area at present, politicaly speaking. (Though Ontario is not much better). Québec, on the other hand, has been one of the least conservative area of America since the Peace and Love movement.

So that is one major cause of friction between the two sides - the RoC (especially the Canadian Alliance sphere of influence) in general is in favor or more "republican" measures - cut social measures to cut taxes, increase prison penalties to youths instead of trying to reeducate them and bring them back in society while there' still a chance, etc. They also tend to be very much pro-life and pro-death sentence.

On the opposite end, Québec (and to a lesser extent some of the other provinces) in general tend to be a bastion of Social-Democracy, one which definitely think that alternative to prison and a make them pay notion of justice are well worth considering (and can be made to work), etc. This is for example illustrated in Gay marriage and such : while this is a federal matter, Québec basically created a new kind of union - under their control, not Ottawa's - that allow gay couples to get on every last point the same rights as married couples.

So while not all of Canada is as conservative as the supporters of the Alliance, the fact is that Western Canada and Québec tend to be on opposite end of the political spectrum, which generates lots of bitterness due to having less control (on the provincial end) of many of the things we care about, and thus being sometime stuck with laws voted for the other provinces.

IE, the Albertans are miffed about not having tax cuts due to the eastern provinces, the Québecers are miffed due to having to deal with the new law on youth crime due to the western ones, and in the end everybody has major grievances about the rest of Canada (from their point of view).

The atlantic provinces are miffed that they aren't receiving more from their richer brothers except new, harsher fishing quotas.
Québec is miffed at constantly having conservative laws pushed down on it.
Ontario is miffed at having to maintain services in french in some areas (see the Montfort hospital case).
the Prairies are miffed at - well, I guess they have to be miffed at something.
Alberta is miffed at being stuck with the social-democrats of the east.
British Columbia is miffed at not being able to culture flip to *insert asian country* ;) (just kidding)
And the natives are miffed at, not having more control over their destinies.

Basically, no one's too happy about Canada as a whole (except Ontario, who pretty much control the balance of power anyway and the Atlantic provinces, who know they actually benefit from the deal), mostly because Ottawa has control in too many fields and is unwilling to give up any of it - but very willing to sneak in provincial fields whenever they want.

Who called em white negers?

english-speakers in general?

Not so much a matter of calling them such as a matter of treating them as such "white niger" became a term of sort to describe the phenomenon by which english-speaking (and I don't mean bilingual, I mean solely english-speaking) people always seemed to be given an edge in work and the like,.

Of course that has changed, but it still rattle, much like any form of discrimination.

What about the "Speak white,speak english" stuff?

*Shrugs* I never personally heard of that one. Doesn'T mean it wasn't used or any such, it only means I have not heard of it - I may know more about Québec history than Ozz, but I do not know everything about it either.

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
*laughs out loud*

And just as some separatists shows the bad side of Québec, Ozz shows the bad side of Alberta.

"Séparatists are whiney little liars that don't know a thing about history and that I'll prove them wrong and..."

Sorry to tell you Ozz, but while the CURRENT SITUATION don't leave as much room for grievance as there was in the past (there's still plenty, from all sides of Canada), historicaly Québec DOES have plenty of room for grievance, due to constantly being forced to do what the RoC wanted them to (Conscription), being forced in with the rest of Canada, being (until the 60s) constantly seen as "White negers" (if you studied Québec history instead of sitting in your ivory tower of alberta, you'd know about that) of sort, etc.

Alberta has its own issues with the federal government - but they do not have the same historical or cultural roots as the separatist movements, though they'd tend to have stronger economical ones. You guys weren't systematicaly used as a (barely) paid labor that was good for nothing else by the rich english families of Montréal for the better part of a two centuries, after all.

The wise speaks only of what they know Ozz. You obviously don't know much about Québec history to make that kind of bland stupid statements such as the fact that separatist only spew forth propaganda without any basis in fact to badmouth canada.

That said, the main difference AT PRESENT between Canada and Québec is cultural even more so than linguistic. Canada - especially west of Ontario - is a very conservative area at present, politicaly speaking. (Though Ontario is not much better). Québec, on the other hand, has been one of the least conservative area of America since the Peace and Love movement.

So that is one major cause of friction between the two sides - the RoC (especially the Canadian Alliance sphere of influence) in general is in favor or more "republican" measures - cut social measures to cut taxes, increase prison penalties to youths instead of trying to reeducate them and bring them back in society while there' still a chance, etc. They also tend to be very much pro-life and pro-death sentence.

On the opposite end, Québec (and to a lesser extent some of the other provinces) in general tend to be a bastion of Social-Democracy, one which definitely think that alternative to prison and a make them pay notion of justice are well worth considering (and can be made to work), etc. This is for example illustrated in Gay marriage and such : while this is a federal matter, Québec basically created a new kind of union - under their control, not Ottawa's - that allow gay couples to get on every last point the same rights as married couples.

So while not all of Canada is as conservative as the supporters of the Alliance, the fact is that Western Canada and Québec tend to be on opposite end of the political spectrum, which generates lots of bitterness due to having less control (on the provincial end) of many of the things we care about, and thus being sometime stuck with laws voted for the other provinces.

IE, the Albertans are miffed about not having tax cuts due to the eastern provinces, the Québecers are miffed due to having to deal with the new law on youth crime due to the western ones, and in the end everybody has major grievances about the rest of Canada (from their point of view).

The atlantic provinces are miffed that they aren't receiving more from their richer brothers except new, harsher fishing quotas.
Québec is miffed at constantly having conservative laws pushed down on it.
Ontario is miffed at having to maintain services in french in some areas (see the Montfort hospital case).
the Prairies are miffed at - well, I guess they have to be miffed at something.
Alberta is miffed at being stuck with the social-democrats of the east.
British Columbia is miffed at not being able to culture flip to *insert asian country* ;) (just kidding)
And the natives are miffed at, not having more control over their destinies.

Basically, no one's too happy about Canada as a whole (except Ontario, who pretty much control the balance of power anyway and the Atlantic provinces, who know they actually benefit from the deal), mostly because Ottawa has control in too many fields and is unwilling to give up any of it - but very willing to sneak in provincial fields whenever they want.


:lol:
You should run for the NDP or be on the comedy network after spewing that load of crap. I'm not from Alberta, I lived in Quebec. and now live in Ontario. Professor Einstein.

Lets see some facts here, all your spouting is

1. Conscription - had to force "some" quebecers to guard the
Trent canal. While "some'' Canadians were fightin' and dieing
to prevent Hilter from enslaving us all. I wouldn't drag that
shameful incidence of cowardice out of the closet.

2. Gay marriage. The very fact you dragged out this issue as
important shows your priorities are warped, I bet your
lifestyle is too. :lol:

3. Ontario "miffed" at having to provide french hospital services
for a very small french minority. We got more chinese and
italians who need the service being still unilangugal than french
people who can speak english, but are just being a pain in the
ass.

"Séparatists are whiney little liars that don't know a thing about history and that I'll prove them wrong and..."

No separtatists are a whiney bunch of losers who try a twist historical facts around to justify their cause. That is if they're
not murdering people like Laporte.

Ozz Ozz Ozz...what are we going to do with you? You say more and more stupid things about this...

You said:
"1. Conscription - had to force "some" quebecers to guard the
Trent canal. While "some'' Canadians were fightin' and dieing
to prevent Hilter from enslaving us all. I wouldn't drag that
shameful incidence of cowardice out of the closet. "

Just look in an history book my friend...Dieppe? does it ring a bell or are you in denial? Québécois were against the conscription for an "Empire" war between the English Empire and the German Empire in WW1 but they did have to go fight and they did. WW2 is something else. Once again, Québécois didn't want to go fight a war for the British Empire, just like the Americans who, before Pearl Harbor, were saying that it was an European war. English Canadians still considered themselves British citizens at the start of the century so they were more than happy to fight for the Empire, French-Canadians were not.

Quote:
"2. Gay marriage. The very fact you dragged out this issue as
important shows your priorities are warped, I bet your
lifestyle is too. "

Do I need to explain...? Human rights are a priority for us, you got a problem with that?

Quote:
"3. Ontario "miffed" at having to provide french hospital services
for a very small french minority. We got more chinese and
italians who need the service being still unilangugal than french
people who can speak english, but are just being a pain in the
ass."

500,000 french people is the BIGGEST minority in Ontario, saying the contrary is very, very dumb. And we, in Québec, have to provide schools, hospitals, universities and all sorts of services in english, that's not a bad thing you know...It's important to be fair towards the minorities, everywhere, not just in Québec.

Quote:
"No separtatists are a whiney bunch of losers who try a twist historical facts around to justify their cause. That is if they're
not murdering people like Laporte."

Seems like you are the one twisting my friend... Pierre Laporte was killed by the FLQ, a terrorist group from the 60's and early 70's, not all separatist people support what they did, only a very thin percentage, like in all society, we also have our extremist. Those people are morons and so are you.

You should think before your pen sets sail without a compass.

1. Everybody was "forced" to fight in WW1. Including Yankees.
Quebec wouldn't support anyone in WW2, like Ireland it was
just waiting to kiss up to the winner. Quebec won't fight for
the Empire, Quebec won't fight for France, Quebec won't fight
for Canada, I doubt Quebec would even fight for Quebec.

2. Human rights in a pigs eye, it's a cash grab for health benefits
and pensions for "working" "men" that were set up to support
women who had children and stayed home 16 years raising
them. What a bunch of leechs.

3. .5 million, We got more Italians than that, and the french can
speak english, the Italians and chinese always can't. Who
really needs it as opposed to who can demand it.

You serve up the usual separtatist fare. An order of twisted
facts with a side of personnal insult.

Waiter, wheres the Beef! :lol:

1)It still remains the fact that in both World War I and II, Canada joined the war *FOR BRITAIN* and that Québec was less-than-interested in fighting for england because the rest of Canada wanted to. Oh, sure, France was in the battle too - but it's not like Québec is all THAT close to France either.

Had there been a direct threat to Canada (no, there wasn't), then probably yes the people of Québec would have fought. But going oversea to fight in what was essentially (to people in Québec and in the US too) an European problem and die for the British Empire?

Why would the people of Québec show any interest in that?

The truth is, regardless of wheter you like it or not, TWICE the people of Québec got forcibly involved in a war they felt was NO concern of Québec - and rightly so, at the time the war was declared - and were soon forced to conscript for it. And even worse, in World War II they had to hold a nation-wide vote to free the government of the promise (to Québecers) NOT to impose Conscription. The promise had been to the people of Québec, everyone got to vote. And of course, the province of Québec voted "No" and about everyone else voted "Yes", in the end winnign it out.

I'm sorry if you don't like it, but that's quite a good start for causing resentment. Being forced in war that was no concern of ours, then drafted because of it, especially after being cheated of a promise that had been made to us primarily by the english canadians...

If you expect the average french Québecer to like it and smile, then you are a pathetic moron. Regardless of wheter not wanting to die for Europe was right or wrong (I'm sure Americans will enjoy terribly your notion that waiting until you are attacked was an horrible thing to do), the fact is, this is one of the many occasions were Québecers had the will of the rest of Canada forced on them despite what they wanted.

It's not a matter of right and wrong - it's a matter of the fact that *CONSTANTLY*, the people of Québec tend to be in major disagreement with the so-called "Rest of Canada" and to have, often, by the weight of demography alone, to go with what the rest of Canada wants.

2-AGain *I* did not bring it up as a matter of human rights or anything. I brought it up to illustrate the much more (moraly) liberal views of things in Québec as opposed to the RoC especially Alberta and the like.

Once more, pointing out the fact that Québec more often than not is in opposition to the Rest of Canada on many topics.

As I said before, it's no longer so much a matter of Canada doing "atrocious" things to Québec - no "Beef". There's no big fight, just a matter of "When do we ever agree anymore?".

Québec and Canada just don't get along very well.

1)Old wounds. English canadians tend to think of Québecers as cowards in regard to the war matter (as you are happily demonstrating) ; and Québecers tend not to forgive the whole conscription debacle to fight a war for an empire they felt no ties to.

2) Opposition of world views. While the RoC is not a monolithic block in agreement, it tends generally to be a whole lot more conservative than Québec, which opposedly is a very liberal province in moral terms. I'm not saying anything is right or wrong there - I'm just saying it keep causing hard-to-deal with situation where Québec winds up in full opposition to especially the western provinces.

3)Ottawa's habit to meddle in every field that's NOT theirs on the constitution and try to tell the provinces what to do. That's throwing salt on a sore wound, especially since their priority and Québec's are rarely on the same wavelength.

I'm sure Alberta's complaints are along the same wavelength - they see themselves as opposed on many notions to the RoC, and forced by demographic weight alone to accept Canada's choice.

And I'm sure Ontario has much of the same problem on one topic or another, and BC, and Manitoba, etc.

Personally, I will now note that I am *NOT* independantist. I'm "Who-gives-a-damn-ist" But I happen to know many them, and your description of independantist turn my stomach - it has nothign to do with the truth, except in your warped vision of things. They are absolutely normal person, not the rabid fanatics you try to paint them as in your BS.

And concerning Laporte, get out of the 70s - that was one dark time over 30 years ago with a very small group doing things nearly everyone agree was disgusting. The FLQ has nothing to do with the average indepandantist.

Geez.

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
(1)Why would the people of Québec show any interest in that?


Because the people of Quebec swore than oath to be loyal
subjects to the crown in order to retain their instiutions, Won't
fall for that one twice, the Acadians are at least respectable.

Canada fought for Britain because Britain was the leader
in the fight against German oppression. And would be until
June 6,1944.

Also it's better to fight in Europe than wait and have the
hot rake of war dragged across your own country. Which
would be exactly what would have happened.

Save yer excuses for the Irish Republic, they'll agree with you.
Everyone else will look rightfully on you with disstain.

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga

And concerning Laporte, get out of the 70s - that was one dark time over 30 years ago with a very small group doing things nearly everyone agree was disgusting. The FLQ has nothing to do with the average indepandantist.
Geez.

get out of the 40s - that was one dark time over 50 years ago.
get out of the 14s - that was one dark time over 90 years ago.
get out of the 60s - that was one dark time over 150 years ago.
get out of the 60s - that was one dark time over 250 years ago.

Murder, Kidnapping is a part of the history of the movement. No skeletons hidden in the closet here. Let all the facts come out.

One murder, once. Thirty years ago in the history of ONE SMALL BRANCH of the movement.

As for the oath, it's not like we were given much of a choice way back.

And no, I don't think Hitler would have then turned to conquer America - first, the technological difficulties of a cross-atlantic invasion would have been staggering. Second, fighting in America - THAT would have drawn the United States in, removing the illusion that they were safe on their side of the Atlantic just as much as Pearl Harbor. Third, Hitler was not all that interested in fighting the english.

And I won't adress the Irish as for "Not entering the war until your country is directly attacked".

I'll adress the Americans instead. You know, the people who stayed out of the war until Japan directly attacked them?

I think they'll understand what you're too blind to see.

And now, this is my final post in this thread. You obviously won't abandon your fanatical delusion that separatist are whiney evil liars who have nothing better to do than warp historical facts and murder people.

I have better things to do than waste my time on you.

Originally posted by Oda Nobunaga
One murder, once. Thirty years ago in the history of ONE SMALL BRANCH of the movement.

How many do you need?


As for the oath, it's not like we were given much of a choice way back..[/B]

The usual choice yes or no, or in your case yes with no
intention of keeping your word.

[i]
And no, I don't think Hitler would have then turned to conquer America - first, the technological difficulties of a cross-atlantic invasion would have been staggering. Second, fighting in America - THAT would have drawn the United States in, removing the illusion that they were safe on their side of the Atlantic just as much as Pearl Harbor. Third, Hitler was not all that interested in fighting the english...[/B]

He liked fighting, with UK and USSR dead, USA would be no
problem.

[i]
And I won't adress the Irish as for "Not entering the war until your country is directly attacked

I'll adress the Americans instead. You know, the people who stayed out of the war until Japan directly attacked them?

I think they'll understand what you're too blind to see." [/B]

What making money and sucking every last dollar out of the
British, until Japan poked them in the eye. Even the Americans
were not so stupid not to realize the defense of america began
in Britain. Thats what lend lease was all about, when they had
sucked out every dime they gave the stuff to the british for
free.

[i]
And now, this is my final post in this thread. You obviously won't abandon your fanatical delusion that separatist are whiney evil liars who have nothing better to do than warp historical facts and murder people.
I have better things to do than waste my time on you. [/B]

[i]Originally posted by Ozz
I just post to Quebec thread cause I don't like separtists bad mouthing me and my country in an international forum without
showing with logic/facts what a bunch of liars they are.[/B]

Another notch in thee olde pen.

Don't you guys forget the "Act of Union" when a certain guy named "Lord Durham" said that Quebec was a "cultureless" civilisation? With this union french-canadians inherited a very very nice gift: DEBTS! And even if we had 200k more ppl than upper-canada (well it's "haut-canada" in french...) english-canadians had the same number of seats than french-canadians! Is it what you call a democracy? Or english-canadians just considered themselves "superior"?

Thereafter, a lot of English immigrated in Canada and their population became more important than the French-Canadians. But the seats were always the same! So what did they do? Confederacy (Acte de l'Amérique du Nord Britannique which must be Britannic North American Act in english)! That way they would get their "proportionnal representation" back... Well when it was the french in majority that wasn't a problem to have the same number of seats! With Confederacy they also gave Quebec the rightful share of their debts (½) even if they had more population...

(P.S.: it's poorly translated from my french history book sorry for the inconvenience)

Now we can go back in 1982 where Trudeau rapatriated the constitution, every provinces signed it... except Quebec! But it wasn't important to get Quebec's approval after all since the majority of the provinces already signed it! (Frogs opinion isn't so important for you right?)

At the time, the "commandit program" of Jean Chretien cost something like 100,000K $ and is primarily used to make the Canada "more visible" everywhere in Quebec. I mean really EVERYWHERE --> TV, Major events, radio, highways, signs, etc. So much of propaganda, I couldn't even count the number of time I see a Canada flag in a single day!

Explain me Canadians! Explain me what's going on!?!

I'm personally very BORED and SHOCKED of Canada and I wouldn't hesitate to vote "YES" at any future referendum.

Ozz stop ur childish behaviour please.

Quebec cleverly uses the separation thing to suck money into the province (hey why not play the card if you have it.)

They also turn down lots of money over separation. Many times they've refused millions of dollars from the federal government. For example, a few years back tthe provincial government was about to build a bridge. The federal governemnt offered to contribute millions of dollars to help out. The Parti Quebecois turned down the money so they wouldn't have to put a Canadian flag on the bridge. I've also been screwed out of money personally by the PQ. Two of us did this project at school to put on the school's website. A federal program would give us, I think it was like, 6 hundred $ for computer room stuff for making educational web projects, it's a way of promoting computer work in schools. Well when it came time to get the money, the PQ blocked it and said we couldn't receive money from that program because we would have to put a Canadian flag on our site. I think it's only fair to put one there considering they would have given us hundreds of dollars. And we really didn't mind putting a flag there, we wanted to.

True but most young québecers vote "yes" and most old people vote "no". The more years it pass, the more young men and women are able to vote.

This situation is starting to reverse. I'm seventeen and the feeling among people my age (also slightly older ones and younger ones too), even unilingual French speakers, is against the PQ and separation. While some older folks (not elderly, but the generation before us) feel that they need to separate to keep the French language and culture alive, most people my age are proud to be Quebecers and proud of the language and culture, but also feel that they should be learning English and cooperating with English Canada in order to succeed and bring prosperity to Quebec. For this reason a lot of them are miffed at the PQ for enforcing regulations which ban everyone from going to English schools except for immigrants, or people who have a parent or grandparent who went to English school. I was lucky, my mom having gone to English school, so I was allowed to go too. Not so for many others. So anyway this generation is turning 18 and becoming part of the voting force. Therefore I think separation has lost very much support as well as the PQ, as evidenced by the latest polls, which show Mario Dumont's ADQ and even the Liberals ahead of Landry's PQ.

Originally posted by bad_leprechaun
Quebec cleverly uses the separation thing to suck money into the province (hey why not play the card if you have it.)

They also turn down lots of money over separation. Many times they've refused millions of dollars from the federal government. For example, a few years back tthe provincial government was about to build a bridge. The federal governemnt offered to contribute millions of dollars to help out. The Parti Quebecois turned down the money so they wouldn't have to put a Canadian flag on the bridge. I've also been screwed out of money personally by the PQ. Two of us did this project at school to put on the school's website. A federal program would give us, I think it was like, 6 hundred $ for computer room stuff for making educational web projects, it's a way of promoting computer work in schools. Well when it came time to get the money, the PQ blocked it and said we couldn't receive money from that program because we would have to put a Canadian flag on our site. I think it's only fair to put one there considering they would have given us hundreds of dollars. And we really didn't mind putting a flag there, we wanted to.

True but most young québecers vote "yes" and most old people vote "no". The more years it pass, the more young men and women are able to vote.

This situation is starting to reverse. I'm seventeen and the feeling among people my age (also slightly older ones and younger ones too), even unilingual French speakers, is against the PQ and separation. While some older folks (not elderly, but the generation before us) feel that they need to separate to keep the French language and culture alive, most people my age are proud to be Quebecers and proud of the language and culture, but also feel that they should be learning English and cooperating with English Canada in order to succeed and bring prosperity to Quebec. For this reason a lot of them are miffed at the PQ for enforcing regulations which ban everyone from going to English schools except for immigrants, or people who have a parent or grandparent who went to English school. I was lucky, my mom having gone to English school, so I was allowed to go too. Not so for many others. So anyway this generation is turning 18 and becoming part of the voting force. Therefore I think separation has lost very much support as well as the PQ, as evidenced by the latest polls, which show Mario Dumont's ADQ and even the Liberals ahead of Landry's PQ.

Your confounding the dislike of the PQ with the dislike of the sovereignty. I'm not a big fan of the PQ myself but it could have not been better with the PLQ and maybe worse with ADQ. They also need a leader Landry is not very charismatic.

Originally posted by tonberry


Your confounding the dislike of the PQ with the dislike of the sovereignty. I'm not a big fan of the PQ myself but it could have not been better with the PLQ and maybe worse with ADQ. They also need a leader Landry is not very charismatic.

peut-être l'UFP ;) (j'ai hâte de voir comment ils vont s'organiser en si peu de temps!)

Originally posted by FrosTi


peut-être l'UFP ;) (j'ai hâte de voir comment ils vont s'organiser en si peu de temps!)

If they present someone in Richelieu I'll vote for them but it take years to establish a credibility in politic.

p.s: je sais que c'est dommage mais pour que les modérateurs fassent leurs travail, ils doivent pouvoir lire ce qu'on écrit.;)

Quebecs French and Canada's English. They should be different countries

Originally posted by tonberry
p.s: je sais que c'est dommage mais pour que les modérateurs fassent leurs travail, ils doivent pouvoir lire ce qu'on écrit.;)

Il y a rien à modérer ici ;)

Originally posted by FrosTi


Il y a rien à modérer ici ;)

There may be nothing to moderate here, but the moderators don't know that unless they can understand what you are writing. It is a violation of site rules to post messages in languages other than English.

By the way, I put your post through the Babelfish translator in order to understand it. Moderators are not going to bother doing that. ;)

Originally posted by Switch625


There may be nothing to moderate here, but the moderators don't know that unless they can understand what you are writing. It is a violation of site rules to post messages in languages other than English.

By the way, I put your post through the Babelfish translator in order to understand it. Moderators are not going to bother doing that. ;)

Bah it wouldn't be the first time i get banned for a dumb reason ;)

Two of us did this project at school to put on the school's website. A federal program would give us, I think it was like, 6 hundred $ for computer room stuff for making educational web projects, it's a way of promoting computer work in schools. Well when it came time to get the money, the PQ blocked it and said we couldn't receive money from that program because we would have to put a Canadian flag on our site. I think it's only fair to put one there considering they would have given us hundreds of dollars. And we really didn't mind putting a flag there, we wanted to.

It's a matter of competences. Education is provincial and the federal government as nothing to do with it. Of course they always try but the provinces are right when they refuse it. If the fedral government wants to help out with education it should transfer our money back in our treasury...where it belongs...instead of sneaking more propaganda through provincial competences like education. Bourse du millénaire? :lol: