SuperBeaverInc.
Groucho
Closest to Liberals, though not far off from the Bloc and Greens. Though I thought I would get a bit higher on Social liberalism.
The compass shows me a bit closer to social conservatism than I would have thought though. Must have been those immigrant/Quebec questions
Not to derail the thread, but it is somewhat related to the topic and not worth a separate thread:
Why is it that Quebec wants to be independant, or at least have a far greater amount of autonomy? I know that they are heavily French, but is simple cultural differences enough for them to get a large enough party?
Not to derail the thread, but it is somewhat related to the topic and not worth a separate thread:
Why is it that Quebec wants to be independant, or at least have a far greater amount of autonomy? I know that they are heavily French, but is simple cultural differences enough for them to get a large enough party?
It's more than an exaggeration - it's utterly ludicrous. There are (and never have been, to my knowledge) any public places in English Canada sporting signs saying that French speakers are not allowed on the premises. I've never heard of anybody ever being lynched merely for speaking French.A lot of radicals in Quebec would compare their plight to blacks in America. I think that's an exaggeration, but not a wholly unfair comparison when talking about economic opportunity (perhaps a much better comparison would be the class disparity in Northern Ireland).
Aaaagh! Not another Quebec separation discussion!!!!!!!
As a Western Canadian, I can't help but understand the reactions more than the roots. I do know that there was a time when francophones were not well-treated. However, it's not Western Canada's fault that Duplessis controlled Quebec the way he did. Western Canada didn't create that stifling environment - it was elements that existed in Quebec that did that. And yes, I do think that 250 years is a long enough time to at least partially get over a war that actually started in Europe, not here. If we hold on to grudges that happened because of events in 1759, we'll get into the Middle Eastern mindset - they fight because they can't let go of grudges that are thousands of years old! At least we brought our fighting down to a dull roar; it's been ~40 years since anybody was killed in the cause of separatism.What I am trying to address is the root of the separatist movement. You're listing reactions to that movement. For all the complaining I hear about Quebec and language laws, I never once hear any acknowledgement of why the situation has come about. I'm not a fan of language laws, nor am I a fan of Quebec being given special treatment in regards to immigration, or being able to black mail the rest of the country for more favourable terms. But I'm not going to pretend they're acting the part of a spoiled child. Like I said, the comparison to the economic disparity in Northern Ireland is much more apt.
Oh, damn.Also, let us have a moment of silence in respect for Roger Abbott of Air Farce who passed away last night.
I met him once, a very nice man.
Oh, damn.
How did he die?
Not to derail the thread, but it is somewhat related to the topic and not worth a separate thread:
Why is it that Quebec wants to be independant, or at least have a far greater amount of autonomy? I know that they are heavily French, but is simple cultural differences enough for them to get a large enough party?
As for economic opportunities... the federal civil service requires its employees to be bilingual. Some western Canadians see that as a ridiculous requirement, given the relatively small number of Francophones out here who would require French-only services. There are far more people who would benefit from English and Cantonese, Mandarin, Vietnamese, and Cree bilingualism in this part of the country, or English/Inuit bilingualism in the Territories.
Boring, overdone and irrelevant to this election. Not even the Bloc is talking separatism.
As for economic opportunities... the federal civil service requires its employees to be bilingual.