babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
I feel the same way about other parts of Canada, including the province next to me.
And while I DO NOT blame Quebec or any other region of Canada for the flaws in our country I am quite aware of the fact that many of the most important people who have shaped public policy in this country since the 70s have come from Quebec. I know some in Quebec feel on the outside, and I accept that; but it sure doesn't look like it from here, and at the very least, I think we have some common ground in that respect.
What I am saying is that I think the question of sovreignty is a valid one which we all recognize Quebecers have to make for themselves.
But I think it would be a mistake to think that sovreignty is a way of escaping political and social pressures. There is no firewall for these global forces. There are indeed political differences between Quebec and other parts of Canada (not the ROC, because that is not a homogenous culture either) but I don't see how sovreignty is any solution for these other problems.
Well jump in and straighten us out then. It's your thread.
Maybe the discussion would go more in the direction you intended if you got the moderators to change the thread title to, "Quebec's Place in the Federation." Using "Quebec and the Federation" is starting the discussion from a conclusion i.e. that the fundamental nature of the Canadian federation should be a duality.
Without drifting from the thread,I'd like to know what we have learned from our current first takes all electoral system.
There's something wrong when a government is elected with less than 40% of the vote is given absolute power.
How do we fix this problem?
I still stand behind what I say about Quebec being a sovereign nation but besides that,solutions could be made by the following;
No more majority governments without atleast 51% of the vote.
Coalition governments where as all the parties have a say...as well as a law that states MP's cannot cross the floor after elections...the immediate end of the Senate..the provinces given much more power and referendums on social issues like they do in the U.S.
The Harper government has proven that the system is broken and it needs to be fixed.
I'm just looking for solutions.
PR for starters. In a dream world a system of participatory democracy that would provide input into policy decisions combined with a complete ban on corporate lobbyists.
PR and the banning of corporate lobbyists would work better than what I mentioned.
But I don't think any of the parties are interested in that.
And you can't rely on the MSM to bring these ideas to the masses...My guess is that most Canadians haven't a clue what PR is.
as a long time pro-Quebec anglo, doing everything everywhere in French, university in Montreal, Carnaval in Quebec, paddling Baie James, what always surprised me was the long-term attachment of Quebecers to the idea of Canada -- we founded it! people have said.
That is true.
One huge error the PQ made was underestimating that sentiment.
No you didn't. The FN's did. And if you want European beginnings then my Acadian ancestors founded Canada or at least the Maritime part. But you know the Newfs might dispute who founded their part of the country. I doubt if they would think the people of Quebec had much to do with it.
The French presence in the part of the country I live in is non existent. Always has been and always will be. Now if you want to expand the definition of the people who founded this country may I suggest we start including the Chinese. They were the largest non aboriginal non British group in BC at Confederation and unlike the French who got language and religious protection in the BNA Act they got the right to vote stripped away from them and the Head Tax and Exclusion Acts.
I think a good place to start in constitutional talks is to have Mandarin added as an official language. That would help recognize the important contribution historically of the people who build the CPR [many of them died building our countries future] and acknowledge the modern day demographics of BC.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/chinese
Kropotkin, what are you trying to prove? Quebecers have listened to this "you're nothing special" stuff for centuries. Either the nation of Québec is accommodated within the federation, or there will be no federation. That's not a threat. It's a fact of life which all of Canada seems at last to have recognized, more or less. Nothing similar can be said about Acadians or Chinese immigrants.
ETA: just as a for-instance, remind me which of the NDP candidates spoke against asymmetrical federalism. Or against mandatory French on cereal boxes.
It's private member's bill C-306, sponsored by Mathieu Ravignat. Basically, if you're an elected member, and you "become a member of a registered party" other than the one which endorsed your election, you're gone from the House - a byelection is ordered.
End of thread drift.
Marois comes across to me as very mean-spirited, vindictive and a real "hater"...if she could knit I'm sure she would be knitting images of non-francophones into her latest shroud. Her most recent immitation of Marine LePen in appealing to xenophobia must have Rene Levesque rolling over in his grave.
Please pay no attention to Stockholm in any sentence/paragraph/chapter/thread where the word Québec appears. Thanks.
Marois goes on a hate fest attacking Muslims and you try to be an apologist for her - pathetic. So far her entire political philosophy seems to be composed of two points: 1. Another divisive referedum on independence and 2. trying to ban the sale of halal meat and cracking down on Muslim woman wearing veils. She is a hateful xenophobe of the worst sort and she has no redeeming features whatsoever as a human being.
Pauline Marois - if you are reading babble i just want to say 'YOU MAKE ME SICK!!!"
Well, Stockholm has made his feelings known. Now maybe he'll shut up.
Thank you. I think you just said what I said above. The choice is clear and it is Quebec's not mine or my neighbours. Yes Quebec is special but I will never accept that as meaning your citizens get more electoral clout in a democracy. You have your bottom lines I have mine. If Canada breaks up I personally believe that BC would be able to manage just fine without Upper and Lower Canada. I think the Sherbrooke Declaration was one of the dumbest pieces of policy the NDP has passed in a long time. However I will admit in comparison to their slavish devotion to the D2P that this is a minor irritant. Unike their foreign policy their constitutional policy at least will likely not lead to bombing cities.
I don't believe that you or any other person from Quebec can draw up a constitutional change proposal that will pass a referendum. The Charlottetown Accord had the best minds in the country working on it and the consensus of our political elite was that this is what the people of Quebec wanted. It turned out that neither the people in Quebec nor the people in BC wanted that proposal. Lets hear yours!!!
I know I have no way of squaring this circle. That is why I find this whole debate so pointless. This is primarily a family pissing match inside your province. Let me know when you all decide just how special you are compared to the rest of us ordinary citizens and then we'll see whether your proposal for entrenching that specialness will pass. The last one drawn up by Quebec federalists didn't.
And frankly WTF, why you asking me about the positions of NDP candidates.
So you tell me there were no other people involved in the formation of Canada. Sorry for mentioning the Acadians, the Chinese and Newfoundlanders. How anti-french of me to not accept that my country was founded by the people of Quebec alone. Please forgive me for not understanding the true nature of our federation.
well, just to get this back on track (if it ever was), there's something happening in quebec right now, i heard chantal refer to it as the "quebec spring" and i like that. we have a thoroughly radicalized student movement, a massive 'ras-le-bol' earth day/plan nord demo, a wholesale rejection of the current political parties (the pq leads by default and a more efficient distribution of core support) and yet independence isn't really on people's minds. moreover, ndp aside, the current parties just seem completely incapable of capitalizing on the widespread disaffection. i wish amir were more charismatic because i could really see him vaulting to power with a 'massive change' campaign.
amazingly, this is completely off the radar and inconsistent with anywhere else in canada, aside from MAYBE bc in a less pronounced way. i find it suprising and a little depressing at how little bleed over there is, even just into ontario, it's as if there's a wall sectioning off the basic info that would make the quebec events comprehensibe outside of the province. if the pq does return to power, the result is going to be very badly misinterpreted in canada - though the quebec may opportunistically use power to pursue their plans for sovereignty, that's not the mandate they'll have. we're massively displeased witht he content of the government and not the form, there's a sort of rebellion happening against neo-liberal retrenchment, a sense that we've given too much ground for too long, and we've lost all trust in the political elements that sold us the line. and another fairly astounding disconnect with the rest of canada, harper is an icon of this discontent, a george bush-level figure.
Is that not perhaps because one of the main issues is provincial education funding? If you're wondering if others are paying attention, yes, we are. You have only to look at occupy last summer to see that this awareness does not always stop at the Quebec border.
Quebec's not the one with more electoral clout. That's the Maritimes. And Manitoba and Saskatchewan. How come they get a free pass?
Precisely correct Wage Zombie - average population of electoral divisions in Quebec is pretty close to what an average electoral division everywhere in Canada would be were representation to be based on population.
@ flight from kamakura
If you mean to say that at the present time the left in Quebec is more radicalized and organized than in some other parts of Canada, I'd have to agree. And are the issues that you face there different than what we face elsewhere, and to some degree ignored outside of Quebec? Again, yes.
But neither are there too many people down east getting up in arms over the wheat board, TILMA, our new anti-labour legislation, the anti-HST fight, the particulars of our Native and Metis land claims issues, as well as Native economic and self-government issues here, the destruction of our boreal forest, and the prospect of nuclear dumping, and more nuclear power here in the west.
.. to name just a few things other than the oil that is on everyone's mind.
We are all isolated from the centre in our own ways, I can appreciate that Quebec is a particular case because of its cultural and national status, but it is hardly the only region that feels it.
And Stephen Harper is an icon of your discontent? Do you imagine that it is any different for me, or for any progressive people in this country? Anyone there who thinks he stands for us, for the "rest of Canada" or even for the west generally, should give their head a shake, and remember the softwood lumber agreement.
Now if the topic here is going to be estrangement from the rest of Canada, fair enough, since it is your space. If, on the other hand you're talking about how we can support each other, and NOT let these things divide us, I expect I'll be listening with a fair bit more interest.
But I don't really see the sense in complaints about others moving away, made by people who are distancing themselves in exactly the same way. There's nothing there for me to learn at all.
I'd like to respond to a few things that built up through the thread.
First the issue of founding Canada and Québec's role in it. There is a strong argument regarding the Québec nation's relationship with First Nations. They worked together in a way that the English and FN did not. They developed a mixed culture that blended into something new. If you understand Québec well enough you will understand how central FN culture is to it. The argument that the basis for European-FN cultural exchange began there and not in the English settlements.
Québec people for the large part do not choose to measure the relative value of other parts of Canada. You don't hear Québec people denying the uniqueness of other parts of Canada. Their uniqueness is not dependent on whether or not other parts of Canada also have some kind recognition. The assertion of Quebec's desire to define itself is misunderstood in much of Canada in my opinion due to the fact that English Canadians see it as an exclusive and negative assertion. It is not. It is a positive assertion of a people who have a common history and want that protected, recognized and expressed. I have heard nationalists appreciate and respect the other parts of Canada that claim uniqueness. The message often comes out (the way I read it) as if you don't think you are special, don't limit us, but if you want to assert your own identity great-- meet us, respect us and we will reciprocate. However, we don't need your permission to want to assert our direction and will do so regardless of whether you also want to do so.Québec I think is happy to recognize other parts of Canada expressing themselves but do not want to be held back by those who have no such interest.
There are plenty here who can dispute my point of view-- I don't live in Québec any more and have had few recent conversations about this-- however I suspect this has not changed. If the rest of Canada could accept the assertion of Québec's nationhood as a positive expression there would be little conflict especially as they recognize there is nothing limiting about this for anyone else.
The other point I want to make is that there are several parts of Canada that could be viable countries if they separated from Canada. I don't think many serious people can dispute that. I also think that we are a stronger state for being together and for the dynamic variety of nations within that state.
Another thing to remember is that francophones as a founding culture are not limited within the Quebec border - especially here in the west.
I don't mean this as a put down in any way, but rather to point out that these cultural and language matters are not just something between Quebec and the rest of Canada. It defined how this part of the country became what it is, and even if Quebec were to decide for sovreignty, that legacy would still remain.
I agree with all you said, Sean. And you said it well.
That seems to make sense to me as well. And yes, well said.
But some of the assumptions about other parts of Canada - really, the only thing I am raising my eyebrows at - would seem to indicate that some feel otherwise, and care a great deal about what the rest of us do or, from their perspective, do not do.
And in that we aren't that different. I certainly understand grousing about other parts of the country. I do it myself. But, I tend to restrict it to safe targets like Toronto.