Quebec Independence Movement

[Evie]

Uh, warpus, you realize that keeping the south of Quebec put just about the most nationalistic, biggest bastion of pro-independence sentiment still in Canada, right? I somehow don't think that one will work . You'd get another referendum within a year.And per Supreme Court judgement wouldn't be able to keep them in indefinitely.

Better to try to establish a northern corridor to Labrador. First it screws Quebec over better (=loss of most of their resource-rich areas, and, oh, most of Quebec's dams), and second, the natives and scattered miners and industry workers there are far less likely to be very very very angry about being told "Okay, you voted in block for independence, so you can stay in Canada".

That said, I'd just as soon we not have the occasion to do any of that. Independence may (or may not) become necessary/advisable at some point in the future (depending largely on the place of the french language and french people within Canada; and the ability of Quebec to defend its culture within Canada*); at this point it just isn't, and you don't do something that dramatic, that heavy-handed, without a great deal more necessity.

*For example, if the Supreme were to unilaterally strike down Bill 101, things would be a lot different than they are now where the supremes recognize the necessity of it in general, but occasionally strike down provisions that go too far in trying to accomplish those ncecessary goals).

 

[SuperJay]

We had another thread on this topic not long ago, and while that helped me understand the feelings of separatists in Quebec, I still don't see much compelling, practical reason or need for Quebec to become an autonomous nation. Most of the arguments in favor seem to come down to "our culture is important and it's going away," or complaints about language. It sounded like Quebec wants all of Canada to speak French so that all of Quebec doesn't have to speak English.

I don't see how the loss of Quebecois culture is anyone's problem but Quebec's - and not even all of Quebec, given that it's not solely populated by those of French-Canadian heritage.

 

[Zelig]

Well Ive never heard of it. Closest thing to that is those three provinces combining to form a province. We're always underrepresented because of the bigger provinces

I think you mean overrepresented.

Less than 7% of the population means they deserve less than 7% of the representation.

 

[SG-17]

Well Ive never heard of it. Closest thing to that is those three provinces combining to form a province. We're always underrepresented because of the bigger provinces

Join the US and you all will get equal representation in our Senate.

 

[Zelig]

Uh, warpus, you realize that keeping the south of Quebec put just about the most nationalistic, biggest bastion of pro-independence sentiment still in Canada, right?

Not really.

I'd be fine with keeping the red areas.

 

[Evie]

SuperJay - the issue I think goes deeper to the question of whether or not Canada is our country; a country that reflect who we are.

Which, by extension, means the question of whether Canada is a bilingual country (official bilingualism, government offering services in both languages, and both languages used in Canadian events - not "everyone in Canada must speak French"; those who speak English or other languages are entitled to them), or an anglophone country which happen to give a few special privilege to its french people.

At some point, I think most people want to be able to look at their country, and think "This is my country". It's ahrd to do when the country present itself to the world as speaking a language foreign to yours. It can be overriden for some immigrants because they chose tgo move there, because they liked their older country even less; but Quebecois, by and large, are not people who chose to immigrate to Canada, they're people who were there long before Canada.

Zelig - Warpus map also included some blue-heavy parts of Quebec, the Richelieu area, to form his corridor. (Also I'd be curious to see what the results would be now, 16 years later, given that much of the US border strip largely got fancified over the past two or three decades - old anglophone population moving out, new francophone population settling in).

Though to be fair I had forgotten how blue the Saguenay voted. Probably because they were one of the first regions to drop the Bloc afterward (went conservatives).

 

[warpus]

Uh, warpus, you realize that keeping the south of Quebec put just about the most nationalistic, biggest bastion of pro-independence sentiment still in Canada, right? I somehow don't think that one will work . You'd get another referendum within a year.And per Supreme Court judgement wouldn't be able to keep them in indefinitely.

Sounds like.. we'll have to move some people around

I really don't see how Canada could agree to being split in two like that. And giving us the northern part of your province won't exactly work either.

Maybe if you guys build us a tunnel under Quebec independence will be more agreeable to all parties

 

[Evie]

Going by that logic, where you planning to cede British Columbia to America so they aren't split from Alaska?

Now, certainly, there should be an arrangement to permit easy transit through southern Quebec for Canadian good and people. Preferably without customs.

Preferably-er, of course, we'd just avoid the silly thing, keep Canada bilingual, and hope the independence movement doesn't come up with some doomsday argument.

 

[warpus]

Going by that logic, where you planning to cede British Columbia to America so they aren't split from Alaska?

Nobody really cares about Alaska - it's where they keep "special" Americans. Which I suppose is somewhat true about our maritime provinces, but they have fish, and we need it.

 

[Evie]

But to get fish, you need boats. If you have boats, you can get from the maritimes to Labrador or Manitoba without any need for Quebec!

(Also, Alaska has oil which America needs more than you need fishes )

 

[Lillefix]

Being a sympathiser of balkanisation(and at the same time an EU federalist), I say go for it if there's a majority for it.

 

[warpus]

Hey, either way, just don't cut us in two, cause then no more timmy's for you

 

[SuperJay]

At some point, I think most people want to be able to look at their country, and think "This is my country". It's ahrd to do when the country present itself to the world as speaking a language foreign to yours.

I appreciate your explanation, thanks. I can understand that to some degree (though it's an empathetic understanding only, given that I've never lived in a similar situation), and I'd guess that many Quebecois feel that they're a conquered people. Thus, they refuse to assimilate into the rest of Canada, instead expecting that all the other provinces in Canada should become more like Quebec. I'm sure you can see how, to an outsider, that seems a little self-centered. No offense, but the stereotypical "Quebec attitude" often appears - again, to an outsider - to be fairly arrogant, as if you believe in the inherent superiority of Quebec over the rest of Canada and are constantly upset that everyone else in the nation won't just fall into line and recognize that superiority.

It can be overriden for some immigrants because they chose tgo move there, because they liked their older country even less; but Quebecois, by and large, are not people who chose to immigrate to Canada, they're people who were there long before Canada.

Well, their ancestors were - nobody alive today was there before Canada. And I can understand the pride in your history and desire to maintain your culture, but I guess I'm just not seeing how gaining autonomy is directly connected or necessary to preserving that culture. Quebec could certainly keep its unique history and culture alive without severing itself from the rest of Canada, couldn't it?

If you'll allow me to pose another hypothetical - in the absence of an autonomous nation of Quebec, what, in your opinion, would be necessary to make the Quebecois feel that Canada is also their country? Because from down here, it seems like the rest of Canada bends over backwards on behalf of Quebec, but it never seems like it's enough to placate people.

 

[lutzj]

If a majority of Quebecois support it, yes.

Otherwise, no.

 

[Communisto]

If a majority of Quebecois support it, yes.

Why should the burden of supporting such a useless state be put on the rest of us just because some xenophobic nationalists want unsustainable sovereignty?

If everyone in Ontario votes that they should receive a million dollars, is it up to the rest of Canada to pay for it?

 

[Lillefix]

Why should the burden of supporting such a useless state be put on the rest of us just because some xenophobic nationalists want unsustainable sovereignty?

If everyone in Ontario votes that they should receive a million dollars, is it up to the rest of Canada to pay for it?

Why do you think Quebec is unsustainable as an independent country and what do you mean by saying that the rest of Canada has to support it if they become independent?

 

[Evie]

that all the other provinces in Canada should become more like Quebec.

Hmmm. I don't think that's the view so much as the idea is that Canada, at the national level (eg, national institutions, national events - not the individual provinces let alone the individuals) should reflect both its french and english heritage, so that the French peopel can recognize themselves in it, too.

That means official bilingualism (which we have), that means the PM making the effort to use French as well as English (one of the few cases where I agree with Stephen Harper's hard-headedness) when representing the country in public, it means big national events involving a fair effort toward representing the french legacy of Canada and giving it the language sizeable place (not a majority place or even necessarily an equal place with English, but a sizeable one). It's largely an issue of the image of the country, not what individual provinces do.

 

[Communisto]

Why do you think Quebec is unsustainable as an independent country and what do you mean by saying that the rest of Canada has to support it if they become independent?

They dont have the economy to survive without our support, thus they want huge subsidies from us for as long as they would remain an independent state. Hell, every time we have a referendum the CDN dollar plummets.

That means official bilingualism (which we have), that means the PM making the effort to use French as well as English (one of the few cases where I agree with Stephen Harper's hard-headedness) when representing the country in public, it means big national events involving a fair effort toward representing the french legacy of Canada and giving it the language sizeable place (not a majority place or even necessarily an equal place with English, but a sizeable one). It's largely an issue of the image of the country, not what individual provinces do.

You realize of course, that we do all these things already? Except for that last bit about having national celebrations for Quebec, which is obtrusively ridiculous.

 

[Evie]

Emphasis mine

That means official bilingualism (which we have)

that means the PM making the effort to use French as well as English (one of the few cases where I agree with Stephen Harper's hard-headedness)

I didn't ask for national celebrations, I mentioned that in national celebrations the place of French in the country should be clearly visible. Which we have sometimes (Vancouver's closing ceremony) and other times not so much (Vancouver's opening ceremony).

That's as far as being able to identify with the country goes. The other component is being able to defend our culture locally, which largely involves how much and how badly Canada interferes in things like French language laws and all that. The way it's presently done (the Supreme Court recognizing the necessity of defending French, and only canning measures that they feel go too far - generally being reasonable about it all), is fine.

Related to the above points, I don't think that we'll see Quebec's independence any time soon - unless these points start changing for the worse.

 

[SuperJay]

Hmmm. I don't think that's the view so much as the idea is that Canada, at the national level (eg, national institutions, national events - not the individual provinces let alone the individuals) should reflect both its french and english heritage, so that the French peopel can recognize themselves in it, too.

I can understand that, but isn't this already the case? Is the problem a matter of degree?

That means official bilingualism (which we have), that means the PM making the effort to use French as well as English (one of the few cases where I agree with Stephen Harper's hard-headedness) when representing the country in public, it means big national events involving a fair effort toward representing the french legacy of Canada and giving it the language sizeable place (not a majority place or even necessarily an equal place with English, but a sizeable one). It's largely an issue of the image of the country, not what individual provinces do.

Interesting - and do you, as a Quebecker (sorry, not sure if that's the proper term) feel that these things are currently lacking? I ask because Canada seems very much bilingual officially and it's international image seems to represent its French and English roots pretty strongly.