Quebec polls and parties 2014

500 posts / 0 new
Last post
KenS

"Funny" thing is, the PQ also knows that it is highly unlikely the DGEQ is going to find significant voter registration irregularities, and/or do anything to "tighten the rules."

But it does not matter- the PQ is getting what it wants now, in real time.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I have to admit the promise of 3200 social housing units is a solid example to show many of us that the PQ hasn't shifted too far to the right.

I wonder how much housing would be promised by PLQ?....And forget about CAQ with Legault attacking the poor during the debate.

It would be nice to see parties run their campaigns on their achievements and their ultimate goals but thos campaigns are a thing of the past.

Today's politics is all about wedge issues,attack ads and voter suppression.

As for students from other provinces studying in Québec,are they eligible to vote?

If not,the PQ has a case...If yes,they should shut up and move on.

sherpa-finn

With all due respect to Unionist, I should probably have let him share this news flash ....  The Montreal Central of the CSN, representing 92,000 workers has endorsed QS. (Apparently a first for a traditionally PQ union.)

http://fr.canoe.ca/archives/infos/quebeccanada/2014/03/20140323-162749.html

Unionist

sherpa-finn wrote:

With all due respect to Unionist, I should probably have let him share this news flash ....  The Montreal Central of the CSN, representing 92,000 workers has endorsed QS. (Apparently a first for a traditionally PQ union.)

http://fr.canoe.ca/archives/infos/quebeccanada/2014/03/20140323-162749.html

Damn!!! Beat me!!!

But no, it's not a first at all, and the CSN is not "traditionally PQ". In fact, in its origins as the Catholic trade union federation, and until very recent times (i.e. the Quiet Revolution), it religiously (sorry) abstained from partisan stands in electoral politics.

However, in 2012, as since pretty well the birth of QS, the Montréal Council of the CSN has officially endorsed QS candidates where they have a chance of winning (last time they specified Gouin and Mercier), and they called on workers to "consider" voting QS even where they didn't stand much chance, so long as it didn't tip the balance to a CAQ or PLQ win (so, sort of strategic voting). And their stand is very anti-PQ on issues of the economy and social justice.

If you need source materials, I'll go hunting, but I think my memory is good on this score.

It's the FTQ that has unfortunately put more pressure against "vote-splitting" (i.e. voting QS) in the past.

 

lagatta

How about le Conseil du travail de Montréal (FTQ)? Have they at least endorsed Claude Généreux and André Frappier?

DaveW

Ha, headlines tomorrow: PQ defeated by labour and sovereignists!

Unionist

Oh. My. God. How did I miss this??

Quote:

MONTRÉAL, le 14 mars 2014 - Lors de l’Assemblée générale du 11 mars 2014, les délégués et déléguées du Conseil régional FTQ Montréal métropolitain (CRFTQMM) ont adopté deux résolutions dans le contexte des élections provinciales.

 

D’abord, une résolution d’appui à six candidats provenant des milieux syndicaux : Annick Desjardins, conseillère au SCFP dans Notre-Dame-de-Grâce ; Suzanne Dufresne, membre du Regroupement des syndicalistes à la retraite (RSR) ; André Frappier, ancien du STTP et ancien membre du bureau de direction du CRFTQMM ; Claude Généreux, ancien secrétaire-trésorier du SCFP dans Bourassa-Sauvé ; Édith Laperle, conseillère au SCFP dans Outremont ; et Alexandre Leduc, conseiller à l’AFPC dans Hochelaga-Maisonneuve.

Annick Desjardins a tenu à remercier le conseil au nom des six candidats pour son appui. Mme Desjardins a également rappelé aux membres qu’en analysant la plateforme politique de Québec solidaire, ils constateront qu’elle répond amplement aux revendications exprimées par la FTQ dans sa propre plateforme.

Les délégués et déléguées ont également adopté à majorité une résolution dénonçant la candidature de Pierre Karl Péladeau. Ils ont, entre autres, exprimé leurs craintes de voir l’un des plus puissants symboles patronal et antisyndical du Québec joindre les rangs du Parti Québécois. Ils ont rappelé que le renouvellement des prochaines conventions collectives des employés de l’État dans les secteurs public et parapublic, ainsi que la modernisation du Code du travail et de la Loi sur la santé et la sécurité du travail seront des enjeux majeurs pour les syndicats au cours des prochaines années.

Oh. My. God.

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Stockholm, I don't know how many times I've seen your blatant baiting of Quebeckers. Between "pur laine" and comparing anglophone Quebeckers to African Americans during the U.S. Civil Rights movement, it seems no amount of convincing will ever convince you. I'm going to ask you not to post in any thread about the current Provincial election in Quebec. Thanks.

KenS

Context question on the FTQ.

Were there union members running for the PQ they declined to support?

Is that a change from the past for FTQ Montreal?

KenS

Just looking at the pragmatics, rather than my preferences, no matter what the outcome, the PQ has really gone over the top in betting the farm on whatever.

Playing wedge politics does not necessarily bite back. Look at Steven Harper. But you better have a lot of solid 'assets' for playing that game- as Harper does. The Marois PQ is hands down Harper's closest rival in Canada for playing the wedge. And by comparison, the PQ has the unmistakable look of just tossing matches around.

And PKP: willingly trading a bulwark against the CAQ for alienating your solid allies..... the short term for the long term....

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

sherpa-finn wrote:

Embedded image permalink

Nobody involved with putting that graph together noticed that they listed the "Jean-Lesage" and "Laurier-Dorion" ridings TWICE.

Fluff

Are people always this thin-skinned on this board, or just misreaders? What the feck is "Quebec baiting" about Stockholm's comment about the well known "southern strategy", catchfire? It's considered the apotheosis of divide and rule and the desire to replicate it in many places is well documented.  Are disagreements this frequently treated as trolling and how often do requests as paternalistic as "I'm going to ask you not to post in any thread about the current Provincial election in Quebec" take place? If the answer is what I'm beginning to think it is, I'm buggering off.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:
And anyone who wants to build a Left in Quebec needs to face this fact...while it's fine to attack the PQ(which may be becoming a dying party now anyway)a Left can't EVER be built in Quebec by demonizing sovereingntists and by treating sovereigntism as a heresy that must be recanted.  There can't ever be a time in which francophone nationalism WON'T be the organizing principle of any possible Quebec Left. There will be long periods of time(as we're likely heading into now)where that will be moved off of the top of the agenda, but you're never going to get the majority of Quebec francophones to NOT see their status in Canada as an essentially colonized people. 

If Canada is preserved as a unified polity, it will only be done by accepting that francophone Quebec is, always has been, and always will be, a nation-within-a-nation.   Acting like Quebec should be happy with being "just another province" means denying the reality of all the injustices and humiliations that created sovereigntism as a political tradition in Quebec, and means ending up sounding like one of those bitter old Anglos from the Sixties who kept saying "General Wolfe, we need you now".

Learn from that.

As someone from Western Canada, my immediate reaction is "let's just back this train up a bit." The reality that you are describing, indeed the reality that is promoted by the Ontario elite media, is that of "Canada" as it was around the 1840s to 1860s, where what is now Ontario and Quebec each had roughly equal populations within Canada. The country of Canada has grown considerably in that time, and this assumption is no longer operative. In fact, for all the credit he gets as Captain Canada, this assumption was not valid even when Pierre Trudeau was Prime Minister, as is shown by the fact that he barely won any seats in Western Canada. Certainly Quebeckers have legitimate reasons for seeing themselves as being colonized, but you also have to remember that nearly every other province had to be dragged kicking and screaming into Confederation or threatened to separate or even rebelled at gunpoint. The dualistic idea of "Quebec-ROC" is losing traction, even in Quebec. Think about it. Quebec just ended a minority government that lasted 2 years old, and in a minority government every party gets roughly equal exposure. So if it's just a matter of the PQ turning righward, why isn't QS rocketing up in the polls? Why are the Liberals the prime beneficiaries? Blaming the media and the political establishment can only take you so far.

Yes, Quebec has issues that need to be addressed, but if this country of Canada is going to work, every region of the country and the First Nations need to be involved in the discussion, rather than thinking that "Canada" can do something to "accomodate Quebec."

 

I'm not talking about "accomodating Quebec".   I'm talking about recognizing and respecting the political and social mindset in Quebec, about, while working to build a Left everywhere in Canada, acknowledging the particularities about the way the vast majority of Quebec francophones, including many of those who self-identify as federalist, interpret history and their status in Canada.  

Yes, other parts of the country did often show reluctance to join Confederation, but no other area of the country had the experience of being forced to do so as a result of a military defeat by the British Empire(I'm talking about Canadians or Euro- or Anglo/Celtic descent there, to clarify my intent).  For the non-FN populations of what is now Western Canada, there was no equivalent of the Plains of Abraham or the defeat in the Revolt of 1837.  Yes, there are regional inequties and imbalances, but nothing that equates to the sense of having been crushed and conquered.

If you want to get Canada and Quebec leftists working together, you have to respect the historical memory of each...and expecting Quebec francophones to, in effect, "get over it" is like asking the Scots the Cymrae(the Welsh) and Ulster Catholics to see their homelands as simply provinces of Britain.  OR like expecting FN people to just see themselves as "Canadian" and be happy having their kids shipped off to the government school.  To get to universality, you HAVE to honor the particular.

And yes, all that I said in that post applies to people if Mexican ancestry in the U.S who live on lands stolen in the War of 1845, and to First Nation/Native American people across the settler-controlled areas as well.

DaveW

Comparisons to US South are simply goofy; it cheapens debate here;

they're cousins to the 'ad hitlerum' rhetoric that derails debate online so often

Unionist

Fluff wrote:

Are people always this thin-skinned on this board, or just misreaders? What the feck is "Quebec baiting" about Stockholm's comment about the well known "southern strategy", catchfire? It's considered the apotheosis of divide and rule and the desire to replicate it in many places is well documented.  Are disagreements this frequently treated as trolling and how often do requests as paternalistic as "I'm going to ask you not to post in any thread about the current Provincial election in Quebec" take place? If the answer is what I'm beginning to think it is, I'm buggering off.

Thanks for drawing conclusions after spending 15 minutes or so here. You must be some analytical genius. It's not as if we've known Stockholm's Québec habits for years and years. You've really opened my eyes. But I understand that you'll be "buggering off" soon, so on behalf of all babblers, allow me to wish you safe travels and success in all your future endeavours! And thank you once again!!

 

Fluff

Yup, thin-skinned.

Unionist

Ken Burch wrote:

If you want to get Canada and Quebec leftists working together, you have to respect the historical memory of each...and expecting Quebec francophones to, in effect, "get over it" is like asking the Scots the Cymrae(the Welsh) and Ulster Catholics to see their homelands as simply provinces of Britain.  OR like expecting FN people to just see themselves as "Canadian" and be happy having their kids shipped off to the government school.  To get to universality, you HAVE to honor the particular.

Not bad, Ken B. Not bad at all.

 

Aristotleded24

Ken Burch wrote:
I'm not talking about "accomodating Quebec".   I'm talking about recognizing and respecting the political and social mindset in Quebec, about, while working to build a Left everywhere in Canada, acknowledging the particularities about the way the vast majority of Quebec francophones, including many of those who self-identify as federalist, interpret history and their status in Canada.

Agreed.

Ken Burch wrote:
Yes, other parts of the country did often show reluctance to join Confederation, but no other area of the country had the experience of being forced to do so as a result of a military defeat by the British Empire(I'm talking about Canadians or Euro- or Anglo/Celtic descent there, to clarify my intent).  For the non-FN populations of what is now Western Canada, there was no equivalent of the Plains of Abraham or the defeat in the Revolt of 1837.  Yes, there are regional inequties and imbalances, but nothing that equates to the sense of having been crushed and conquered.

Let's ask Louis Riel what he would say in response to that.

By the way, there is a large sense of alienation in Western Canada that takes on many forms. Even after Western provinces had joined Confederation, policies were still designed to benefit the anglo-elite who called the shots along the Quebec City-Windsor corridor. For example, many Western farmers preferred to buy American-made equipment because it was cheaper, but the feds intervened with tarriffs to boost central Canadian manufacturing industries. Mulroney's coalition was based primarily on Western Canada and Quebec. It's not an accident that these 2 regions reacted most angrily to Mulroney's betrayals and failures on constitutional matters, and spawned 2 political parties that proposed a radically different model of Confederation, one of which eventually went on to form the federal government. And that is to say nothing of how Confederation destroyed the Antlantic trading routes upon which what we now call the Maratime provinces now depend.

If you really want to address the Constitution, it needs to be done Venezuela-style. What I mean is a citizen's assembly charged with Canadians educating each other about the history of constitutional discussions, why the issues and problems exist, and ask Canadians directly how to fix these problems, and once you have come up with a document, put it to a referendum. If you let political elites try and hammer out a deal behind closed doors, every special interest group and their dogs are going to come out and say the package doesn't do enough, and it will fail. That's ultimately why Meech and Charlottetown went down in flames.

Unionist

Can we discuss the Québec election? Surely there must be a more appropriate thread for the ventilation of Western Canadian angst. Or are we to expect another "WE F'ING LOVE YOU GUYS" rally any time soon?

 

Aristotleded24

Sorry unionist, I went off on a tangent again, as I tend to do sometimes. You're right.

Brachina

 Quebec was never forced to join confederation, that is historical revisionism. It was forced to join the British Empire, it volunteerily joined confederarion, and in fact was one of the driving forces of the creation of Canada.

 

 And not all the left in Quebec is Soveriegntist, Mulcair is a federalist last time I check. You are reducing Quebecers into charactures, yes much of the left is Soveriegntist, but there federalist leftwingers in Quebec as well, and even amoung Soveriegnists there are many who are Soverniegntists more in theory then in practice, aka they don't want another referundum. I honestly believe if Mulcair does the right things Soveriegnty will continue its descent. Will it die, no of course not. But its influence and support will drop as it because increasingly clear that its pursuit is coming at the expense of progressive issues, and is losing support not gaining it.

Unionist

Brachina, I love you. I want to have your children. Not in a bad way. Really. I've learned so much from you. You are my mentor. My guide. You have opened my eyes, and they shall ne'ermore be closed. You are the Word. The Way. The Wheel. The Whatever. You are all. May you go in peace, and come in perfection. Allahu akbar!

 

cco

We've been so foolish, Unionist, refusing to recognize the powerful Québec francophone left led by Mulcair, Justin Trudeau, and Don Macpherson. I can't imagine how I forgot the referendum on the 1840 Act of Union, or the overwhelmingly democratic nature of shuffling the Province of Canada into confederation using British legislation.

But just like I was told, I now see that I've been "delusional" for failing to recognize the glories of PLQ Mulcair. They broke the mold when they made him, don't ya know!

6079_Smith_W

But if some have the assumption that because sovereignty might not be on the table at the moment Quebec is no longer a nation, and is just another province, there is a problem there. And this treatment of sovreignty as "heresy" is just that, especially if it extends to being suspicious of anyone seeing Quebec as having self-determination, even if they see themselves as a nation within a federation.

Speaking of which, anyone catch Rex Murphy this week? I didn't make it to the end, but it was the worst "shut up, eat your peas and be thankful because people are starving in the rest of the world" take on the revival of sovereignly as an alection issue.

(edit)

Geez, I cross posted with a few.

The mention of Louis Riel is significant, especially when one remembers that in his day the "western alienation" was Native and Francophones.

 

cco

I haven't watched Murphy in years. He's a cut-rate Andy Rooney with a serious entitlement complex. "You know what I hate? Poutine! What's with that?"

6079_Smith_W

I just happened to catch it  because I wanted to see what At Issue said about the debate, and Redford. His "get over sovereignty" rant was really embarrassing, and as I said, I didn't make it to the end.

cco

I'm surprised Steve-O hasn't appointed him to the senate yet. But I'll make him a deal: I'll consider getting over sovereignty the minute he agrees to merge Canada with the US.

(Then, of course, I'd reject that consideration, and redouble my efforts.)

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I just happened to catch it  because I wanted to see what At Issue said about the debate, and Redford. His "get over sovereignty" rant was really embarrassing, and as I said, I didn't make it to the end.

You'd think someone with a last name like "Murphy" would understand the significance of nationalism and historical memory.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Fluff, welcome to babble. I hope you stick around. Actually, babblers tend to be fairly thick skinned. Comes with the territory. My post above, made reluctantly, comes after countless years of Stockholm doing just enough to both bait Quebeckers and not get penalized. It's actually quite impressive. He's a very smart guy. I'm not as smart, but I've been around long enough to know where he's coming from and where I can expect it to go. I'm not into that these days, so I asked him to leave. Stockholm knows the score (and what he's up to) so it'll all be fine. Trust me. Or don't! Either way, it will still be fine.

Now: back to your regularly scheduled Quebec election.

Fluff

Maybe y'all are thick skinned - who the fuck can listen to Rex Murphy! I came to this thread in the first place 'cuz you folks seem to have the polls etc before anybody else did, and I find this campaign both train-wreck fascinating and genuinely important and scary. A lot of cuntaloons have been let out of the box and it's as depressing as hell. Thankfully, there are good people too. Your response was gracious and pretty convincing re: your reaction to stockholm.

It's also VERY debatable whether any nationalist position can be very progressive (there's a word that's losing its shine too) in the long haul. Usually, eventually, people start defining who doesn't belong and it descends from there. Wasn't sure I wanted to be in a place where that position on nationalism seems to be mother's milk orthodoxy -  when it comes to Quebec.  What kind of Anarcho-Syndicalist would I be if I thought nationalism was a very good thing! I'll definitely keep up with everbody's postings on the Qc elections, I've found them indispensable.

lagatta

fluff, I'd counter that the concept of autonomy and self-determination - national or otherwise - is extremely important to anarcho-syndicalists. Historically, look at the cases of anarcho-syndicalists in Catalonia and Euskadi up against the dominant and domineering central Spanish state.

Yes, internationalism is of the essence, but internationalism does not mean looking at the world through the goggles of the dominant language and dominant group, or of the powers that be.

I never watch or listen to Rex Murphy, and it is specifically since that creep insulted a young anarchist phoned in during the Québec summit  protests. Yes, he utterly lacks historical memory both as an Irish descendant and a Newfoundlander. A toady to the mighty.

DaveW

Catchfire wrote:

Fluff, welcome to babble. I hope you stick around. Actually, babblers tend to be fairly thick skinned. Comes with the territory. My post above, made reluctantly, comes after countless years of Stockholm doing just enough to both bait Quebeckers and not get penalized. It's actually quite impressive. He's a very smart guy. I'm not as smart, but I've been around long enough to know where he's coming from and where I can expect it to go. I'm not into that these days, so I asked him to leave. Stockholm knows the score (and what he's up to) so it'll all be fine. Trust me. Or don't! Either way, it will still be fine.

Now: back to your regularly scheduled Quebec election.

OK, well, I started this thread and for a while sustained it with my posts before the election call, and I would not have banned Stockholm , just contested his views;

he knows QC but has a terrible blindspot about voters' ability to set things straight; ex., the charter is on its way out, as it should be, and his screaming distortions added nothing to that outcome

Oh well, I should mention my suspicion that when any thread reaches a certain length it accumulates baggage, and tends toward feuds, ad hitlerum stuff  etc.

In that perspective, I am raising my hand to ask the teacher if perhaps I can please  start a new thread for the last 2 weeks of the election:  "Quebec election -- final 2 weeks and decision", which would unburden this thread and allow it to be relaunched as a QC general polls thread for the rest of 2014....

plus, it is  a pain to always have to find the very last page of a long long thread like this...esp with Babble's oldest-first post ordering

 

 

Fluff

I quite like Khadir's take on the "national question" - all from the ground up and inclusive - kind of a federationism ( I don't know if it's really a word, but it's to disinguish it from the fairly debased "federalism") of willing equals. I believe that many nationalists start out from a good place, especially after having been defined as having some second order value, but I think a lot of history shows that nationalism has a suicide clause built in over eventually defining who doesn't belong - I think it can be a good spring board, but not a very good destination.

Rudolph Rocker's "administration, not governance" covers it nicely -  a lot of the rest scares the shit out of me......Oh, to be called a "young anarchist" again......

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

DaveW wrote:
I am raising my hand to ask the teacher if perhaps I can please  start a new thread for the last 2 weeks of the election:  "Quebec election -- final 2 weeks and decision", which would unburden this thread and allow it to be relaunched as a QC general polls thread for the rest of 2014....

Permission granted. 

6079_Smith_W

Fluff wrote:

It's also VERY debatable whether any nationalist position can be very progressive.

What lagatta said.

Whether a nationalist postion is progressive or not depends on whether you are asserting it on others, or trying to defend your own from some greater power. Quebec's special status doesn't just go away simply because sovereignty might not be in the cards right now. Same thing for First Nations. That's why the assimilationist arguments made by Murphy and others are as insulting as they are.

And to each their own, but Id say we ignore the arguments of our opponents at our peril. I prefer to keep myself informed about what they say and do.

/drift

CanadaOrangeCat

Re: Nationalism, good and bad.

Our current economic system is nameless and faceless. There is a huge pile of money, most of which has been criminally obtained by organized crime, white collar crime, and official corruption. All of the wealth of all of the billionaires in the world is a TINY FRACTION (about 0.2% in my estimation). What they are worth goes across trading desks in London and New York in minutes if not hours. These billionaires like PKP are just shills. Not even they want to face the reality of it. They are paid well not to.

My estimate (based on CIA data in the public domain) is about 30% of the world economy goes to crime and corruption. This money floats around the world in the blink of an eye, looking to turn an instant profit. We all know it. 30% of the world economy would end all poverty and then some. But they need poverty to keep us on the hamster wheel.

How do you keep this system going? Divide and rule. But not even nations, like Metternich did. Individuals. Keep everyone in their detached, schizoid, isolated minds. Reduce jurisdictions to balance sheets. Turn us into slaves of money, when money is supposed to serve us. Most importantly, destroy nations and demonize nationalism at all costs.

Then take all the good stuff from the political agendas, and stick your swastikas and crosses and crowns and flags on it. "National Socialism" as we have seen. This set up the post-war political agenda perfectly. "See, both nationalism and socialism are bad. Only under stateless international capitalism can we be free. Russia? Oh no. Those are Red Fascists! Still have some doubts? Join these Trotskyists! They will tell you all about it!" And I did. One Trotskyist I grew up with is writing editorials for the Financial Times of London. VENDU.

If you want someone to feel as bad as you are, accuse them of being what you are. "Working class? We ARE the party of the working class! Don't you know we did the Reform act of 1832?" Unfortunately, they all learned invective where we did.

This cannot go on. We are people who have had enough. This criminal conspiracy which is masquerading as a world economy destroys families, farms, factories, households, communities, and the very planet we live on. It alienates us from our fellow human beings. The Fall from nature as dubiously explained in Genesis has been followed by a Fall from Humanity. Original Sin II, you might call it. Adam is an indo-european word for 'I' or 'ego'. Work it out.

What fights fascism? Well the Red Army for one thing. They paid the price, didn't they? They did the heavy lifting in that war. 

The good news is once you alienate yourself from nature and the rest of humanity, there is no more escaping. You can stay isolated and create delusional worlds for yourself. You can even make good money at it. Everyone loves a good imagination. However the world becomes so distorted you don't know whether you were looking in or looking out. There is nowhere else to go. Nothing is there. You have to come back to the world and humanity, or perish.

Margaret Thatcher even tried to tell us society did not exist. Climate change denial "has won" according to the Guardian.

So, if socialism is not necessarily a bad thing, neither is nationalism.

I zeroed in on the Cato institute, which is a right-wing think tank in the States. They had these youtube lectures, and one guy said that Germany had better economic growth than the States in the pre-war period because Hitler had implemented more market reforms than Roosevelt!!! Pretty cool National Socialism huh?

If Canada wants to get its act together and show the banksters the boot. One easy step would be to order the bank of Canada to demonetize any anonymous account. If there is no name on it, and we can't find out who you are, the money is gone, or siezed or whatever.

I doubt you would hear much of a peep from Quebec nationalists. But Canada will not before Quebec, because Canada is dominated by the schizoid mentality which needs serious remediation. It is not just about language. It is also about how we view each other as people.

I guess it's what kind of anarchist you are. If you are a Cato-libertarian anarchocapitalist who can rhyme off a few lines of God and the State (I love that thing!), go back to the Tory Party and "shock the casbah". If you are an anarchist who wants social revolution, march.

We have something we need freedom FROM. We are not asking for a freedom TO. If you are buying into the neo-fascist/neo-conservative/neo-liberal agenda, we need freedom from you. The problem for you is you have already taken away everything we had to lose. 

So let's toss the 'nationalism is fascism by necessity' on the junk heap as well. You can use any ideology you like for fascist purposes both pro and con. Environmentalism, Socialism, Nationalism, Racism, Culturalism, Social Darwinism, Libertarianism, etc. In my quest for my home, I had been swayed by some of these things. I think we all were. Every day something comes up. A bittersweet life, I think.

In the end, it is up to your mindset, isn't it? Do you want to belong to something? L'État, c'est nous.

MegB

Let's try to avoid the use of the term "cuntaloon", shall we?

Fluff

I don't know your dirty word policy, but I think it's a very funny word. But I shant use it again, in case anybody gets the vapours. Anyway, after this posting I will avoid silly confrontations by simply using this board as a resource tool and not commenting at all. Problem with recalcitrant poster solved!

Robo

Krago wrote:

Nominations are closed for the Quebec election and only the Liberals are running a full slate of 125 candidates.

 

The PQ is not running a candidate in La Piniere, in support of former Liberal Fatima Houda-Pepin who is seeking re-election as an independent.  The CAQ didn't get enough valid signatures in Saint-Laurent, Soulanges or Westmount--Saint-Louis, and I'm not sure why Quebec Solidaire isn't on the ballot in Nelligan.

 

Here are the totals by party:

  •  125 Parti libéral du Québec/Quebec Liberal Party 
  •  124 Parti québécois 
  •  124 Québec solidaire 
  •  122 Coalition avenir Québec - L'équipe François Legault 
  •  116 Option nationale - Pour l'indépendance du Québec 
  •  60 Équipe Adrien Pouliot - Parti conservateur du Québec 
  •  44 Parti vert du Québec/Green Party of Québec 
  •  24 Parti marxiste-léniniste du Québec 
  •  24 Parti nul 
  •  14 Bloc pot 
  •  6 Mon pays le Québec 
  •  5 Équipe autonomiste 
  •  5 Parti des sans parti 
  •  5 Parti équitable 
  •  3 Parti unité nationale 
  •  1 Parti indépendantiste 
  •  1 Québec - Révolution démocratique 
  •  1 Union citoyenne du Québec / Québec Citizens' Union 
  •  11 (blank) 
  •  815 Total

 

 

Does anyone know if QS purposely decided against running a candidate in Nelligan, or was it an oversight in ensuring the required paperwork got filed? I know that Nelligan is not near the top of the list of likely QS victories, but it has to be less daunting than being the QS candidate in D'Arcy McGee or Robert Baldwin.

Bärlüer

QS did run a candidate, but his/her candidature was rejected by the DGEQ because of "irregularities" (not aware of the details).

Unionist

Unionist wrote:

lagatta wrote:
Mendacious indeed, as corrupt and thuggish "business unions" like Rambo's North Shore heavy equipment operator's local are absolutely uninterested in funding social or "political" causes -

Lagatta - please don't join the anti-union chorus. The fight against corruption and thuggishness and business orientation is for the workers - not the powdered wigs and smirking rolling eyeballs of France Charbonneau and the CCQ and Pauline Marois.

As for Rambo - with all the respect that I have for you, have you talked to any unionized workers lately? He is a hero. His testimony was brilliant. Not a single charge of "corruption" or "intimidation" has stuck to him. You wouldn't believe the number of workers who have told me: "Why don't we have more union reps like him??"

We all agree that trade unions should be strong allies of all progressive causes and not be "business unions". But as a start, they should fearlessly defend workers. If they don't do that, then they can stuff all their other rhetoric.

Maybe Rambo is a bad guy - I don't know - he even admitted that when he was young and foolish, he used an aggressive tone with the bosses, until he was told that he could catch more flies with honey. But if he's a sold-out treacherous thug, that sure didn't emerge from the days he spent being insulted and bullied by the Commission's interrogators, and standing up to their bullshit at every turn.

And by the way, I friended him on Facebook.

UPDATE: Bernard Gauthier was found guilty in January of "intimidating" an entrepeneur in 2013, which he announced he'd appeal. But today - to much rejoicing here - he was handed a conditional discharge. He can't contact the entrepeneur, he has to pay a $500 contribution to the Club des petits déjeuners, and no criminal record - so he can continue his union duties without interruption. Radio-Canada had the report:

Quote:

À la sortie de la cour, M. Gauthier s'est montré satisfait de la décision du juge Michel Parent. « J'espérais que le juge tienne compte de l'appui de la population et du milieu politique et socioéconomique de la région », dit-il.

Dans sa décision, le juge Parent dit avoir pris en considération l'appui régional dont jouit Bernard Gauthier.

Des maires, des préfets et des entrepreneurs de la Côte-Nord ont rédigé des lettres qui louangent le travail du représentant syndical et qui encensent son comportement. Le juge a également tenu compte des origines innues de M. Gauthier.

Une cinquantaine de personnes se sont présentées au palais de justice de Sept-Îles pour le soutenir.

Very nice!

 

bekayne

Unionist wrote:

Unionist wrote:

lagatta wrote:
Mendacious indeed, as corrupt and thuggish "business unions" like Rambo's North Shore heavy equipment operator's local are absolutely uninterested in funding social or "political" causes -

Lagatta - please don't join the anti-union chorus. The fight against corruption and thuggishness and business orientation is for the workers - not the powdered wigs and smirking rolling eyeballs of France Charbonneau and the CCQ and Pauline Marois.

As for Rambo - with all the respect that I have for you, have you talked to any unionized workers lately? He is a hero. His testimony was brilliant. Not a single charge of "corruption" or "intimidation" has stuck to him. You wouldn't believe the number of workers who have told me: "Why don't we have more union reps like him??"

We all agree that trade unions should be strong allies of all progressive causes and not be "business unions". But as a start, they should fearlessly defend workers. If they don't do that, then they can stuff all their other rhetoric.

Maybe Rambo is a bad guy - I don't know - he even admitted that when he was young and foolish, he used an aggressive tone with the bosses, until he was told that he could catch more flies with honey. But if he's a sold-out treacherous thug, that sure didn't emerge from the days he spent being insulted and bullied by the Commission's interrogators, and standing up to their bullshit at every turn.

And by the way, I friended him on Facebook.

UPDATE: Bernard Gauthier was found guilty in January of "intimidating" an entrepeneur in 2013, which he announced he'd appeal. But today - to much rejoicing here - he was handed a conditional discharge. He can't contact the entrepeneur, he has to pay a $500 contribution to the Club des petits déjeuners, and no criminal record - so he can continue his union duties without interruption. Radio-Canada had the report:

Quote:

À la sortie de la cour, M. Gauthier s'est montré satisfait de la décision du juge Michel Parent. « J'espérais que le juge tienne compte de l'appui de la population et du milieu politique et socioéconomique de la région », dit-il.

Dans sa décision, le juge Parent dit avoir pris en considération l'appui régional dont jouit Bernard Gauthier.

Des maires, des préfets et des entrepreneurs de la Côte-Nord ont rédigé des lettres qui louangent le travail du représentant syndical et qui encensent son comportement. Le juge a également tenu compte des origines innues de M. Gauthier.

Une cinquantaine de personnes se sont présentées au palais de justice de Sept-Îles pour le soutenir.

Very nice!

 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/12/24/quga-d24.html

Bernard “Rambo” Gauthier, a prominent official with the Quebec Federation of Labour’s construction wing (FTQ-Construction), has taken the leadership of a new right-wing populist party. Citoyens au pouvoir (Citizens to Power) combines anti-immigrant broadsides with demagogic denunciations of the “establishment.”

At the Dec. 6 press conference at which Gauthier announced that he will stand as Citizens to Power’s 2018 Quebec election candidate in the North Shore riding of Duplessis, the FTQ-Construction Local 791 official denounced immigrants, going so far as to call them “invaders.” “At one point,” said Gauthier, immigration “was okay, but now it’s getting out of hand.”

“We need to take care of the people from here, before looking after outsiders,” continued Gauthier. He also attacked Quebec’s policy of “reasonable accommodations” for religious minorities, saying “we do not want any of that” and claiming that for the people of Quebec’s regions what is happening in the cities is “scary.”

Gauthier rebuffed press suggestions he is a Québécois Donald Trump, noting he is an “ordinary taxpayer,” not a billionaire. But he added he has learned from Trump’s election victory.

Gauthier peppered his remarks with vulgar language, denounced Quebec’s traditional parties, and promised to “restore power to the people.” Referring to social inequality and growing poverty, he said: “Everything to the richest and nothing to the poorest, it must f---ing stop.”

Gauthier raised the specter of “violence,” saying he has entered politics to try to avert a “civil war.”

 

 

 

lagatta4

WSWS has ZERO understanding of the dynamics of class struggle and the national question in Québec, and spits on everything that moves here, from the student movement to Québec solidaire.

I'm quoted from an earlier discussion, and had modified my view on Rambo Gauthier after the discussion with Unionist (though I found it odd to be suspected of not having discussed with unionists recently then).

I certainly wouldn't call the party unabashedly "right wing" - there are some very progressive demands. I think the suspicion of immigration is based on ignorance - it is found most in places with relatively few immigrants and has to be combatted, but through popular education. Gauthier is also very proud of having Innu roots and had done a lot to integrate Innu people into the industry, even in specailized trades.

Unionist

lagatta4 wrote:

WSWS has ZERO understanding of the dynamics of class struggle and the national question in Québec, and spits on everything that moves here, from the student movement to Québec solidaire.

I'm quoted from an earlier discussion, and had modified my view on Rambo Gauthier after the discussion with Unionist (though I found it odd to be suspected of not having discussed with unionists recently then).

I certainly wouldn't call the party unabashedly "right wing" - there are some very progressive demands. I think the suspicion of immigration is based on ignorance - it is found most in places with relatively few immigrants and has to be combatted, but through popular education. Gauthier is also very proud of having Innu roots and had done a lot to integrate Innu people into the industry, even in specailized trades.

What lagatta said.

 

lagatta4

Here is what Amir Khadir wrote about Bernard "Rambo" Gauthier. Thought it was spot on. Khadir was certainly not excusing populist attacks on immigrants and refugees - remember that his family and that of his wife Nima were refugees from Iran.

M. Gauthier est une victime du discours des élites qui véhiculent des préjugés sur l’immigration. Il se trompe sur les responsables de la situation au Québec, mais il ne se trompe pas en identifiant les millionnaires et milliardaires qui contrôlent notre système politique!

Nous allons changer le Québec avec tout le monde qui y habite, peu importe l'origine ou la couleur de peau. Si nous voulons remplacer cette élite qui nous gouverne, c'est ensemble que nous allons y parvenir!

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

I must say I'm really tired of all the right wing parties in this province. And I think 'right wing' and 'populist' is a complete oxymoron.

lagatta4

alan, one thing I do find heartening is Valérie Plante's election as Projet Montréal leader with a far more progressive platform (on social issues as well, not only environmental ones). Also, Québec solidaire greatly increased its share of votes in the recent by-elections, though we didn't win any (I don't think we were expecting to). I'll try not to slag you about the expression "this province", which evokes columnists at the Gazoo...

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

lagatta4 wrote:

alan, one thing I do find heartening is Valérie Plante's election as Projet Montréal leader with a far more progressive platform (on social issues as well, not only environmental ones). Also, Québec solidaire greatly increased its share of votes in the recent by-elections, though we didn't win any (I don't think we were expecting to). I'll try not to slag you about the expression "this province", which evokes columnists at the Gazoo...

'This province' wasn't intended as an insult. I'm just tired of all the right wing bullshit. But thanks for pointing out some bright sides. Maybe our politics aren't as gloomy as I perceive them to be.

lagatta4

Oh, I'm sick of rightwing bullshit too, especially with the Liberals and the CAQ trying to outdo each other on it. And their vicious attacks on vulnerable people, though that is hardly restricted to Québec.

Another small positive is the remarkable success of the crowdfunding campaign by Ricochet defending itself against windbag and strikebreaker Richard Martineau.

Pages