Quebec future in Harper Majority

I hope Quebec is patient.

The sovereignty movement will be woken up.

Interest in sovereignty will be as strong as it was in the late 1970's.

Quebec and Canada no longer have anything in common.

alan smithee wrote:

The sovereignty movement will be woken up.

Interest in sovereignty will be as strong as it was in the late 1970's.

Quebec and Canada no longer have anything in common.

I think you are right that Harper has the ability to reignite a separatist firestorm.

However your comment that various parts of the country no longer have anything in common highlights the disservice our FPTP system does to our democracy.  Quebec indeed voted over 42% for the NDP. In Atlantic Canada, Sask., and BC the NDP got about 32% of the vote.  I don't see that as having nothing in common.  

However in Quebec our stupid system gave the NDP 61 of 75 seats so it looks like the overwhelming majority of Quebecers rode the orange wave. While in fact the orange wave was only a third larger in Quebec.

In Saskatchewan the NDP polled about the same as in BC and they got 0 of 13 seats.  In BC they got 12 of 36.  So it looks like no one in Sask. shares the same values as the people who voted for the NDP in Quebec because they didn't win any seats. They do however share many political ideals and a common left of centre vision for the country. 

Now if you equate Ontario with Canada, as too often happens, then in fact the difference in the vote between 42% and 26% is far more substantial than in other parts of the country.  How you view the numbers IMO is determined by which lens you choose to look through. 

And just this morning Sask Premier Brad Wall referred to the NDP as a "Quebec" party. 

Do these so-called federalists realize how anti-federalist they are behaving? I think the reaction in Quebec is not even our main concern.

@alan

Sorry. You are wrong. I voted NDP, and I am thankful for the overwhelming turnout in Quebec. 

But if you claim that the "ROC" overwhelmingly said no, you are ignoring a significant percentage of the population

You want to cut your losses and run, fine.  it does not speak well to the idea of solidarity.

And if you don't see that, well I think you expressed the inapproriate sentiment in your last sentence.

Quebec's presence may be the one thing that restrains Harper and Co. from moving too far right.

ROC only exists in the minds of deluded Quebec nationalists.  905 TO is not the rest of Canada. If you can't tell the difference between NF'LD, Toronto and Vancouver Island you are either being willfully blind and have very seldom left Quebec.

In 1988 the Quebec population voted to give us free trade and we have been paying for that decision for 20 years. The fact that Mulroney was a Quebecer seemed to be more important than the fact that he wanted to sell the country down the river.  So save me your moralistic bullshit.

Since you are laughing at one of the possibilities I will take it you are willfully blind and only see the world through a very narrow lens. If you have been to many parts of Canada and you can't see the difference then you are conflating culture with language. They are separate and conjoined not two words for the same thing.

I'm not trying to alienate those who didn't vote for Harper outside of Quebec.

But let's face it,the rest of the country,for the most part,is not progressive and this election proved it.

There was even an impromtu protest through the streets of Montreal last night against the Conservatives.

I think Quebec is a province with a conscience...I can't say that about Alberta,for example.

Pardon me if I'm pissed at the result.

The election just ended...I'm hoping that all of us throughout Canada that do not support this government will gel in solidarity.

I'm just not convinced that the Conservatives will fall out of favour in the ridings they won last night any time soon.

alan smithee wrote:

I think Quebec is a province with a conscience...I can't say that about Alberta,for example.

Pardon me if I'm pissed at the result.

I'm pissed too. I just don't have the luxury of being territorial about it. And you are wrong in making such a generalization about the people of Alberta. 

As I said, if you want to work for sovereignty that is your business, but I would urge you to let the shock of this subside and realize that there are people throughout this country working for the same thing as you are, and that blaming others for this surprising outcome is not helpful.

Or we could compare mayors. I think Alberta might be at a bit of an advantage there.

Ugh...generally offended that you'd present ROC as a united whole (it's own "solitude"), your lack of knowledge on the ROC outside of Quebec rivals my lack of knowledge of quebec ^^

alan smithee wrote:

Wow...I never left Quebec...LOL

Quebec didn't give us this Harper majority.

Spin it any which way that makes you feel better..Doesn't change the fact.

Many things can happen in the course of 5 years...I hope it brings a referendum and a massive yes vote.

Just because Quebec voted NDP and the ROC didn't doesn't mean you should focus on seperating from canada. There are other factors at play. BC went NDP, so did parts of Ontario and downtown Toronto and they made gains in Atlantic. Also, provincial governments affect federal vote and these are affecting political moods as well. Next time the Liberals will be even more irrelevant and NDP will get majority.

Who wouldn't want this guy as your MP?

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/sports/Cannon+loses+newcomer+major+upset/47...

This is why I never voted for the PQ.

When Levesque died,the party lost it's identity.

The last election,Charest won because he went up against a real dud..(Quebec's answer to Iggy)...Andre Boisclair.

When he was chosen the new leader of the PQ,I called it right away..I said he'd fail and he did--miserably.

I'm also not delusional..The PQ have not been a left wing party since the end of the 80's.

They're like the Liberals,they like to play both sides of the fence which is a proven losing formula.

Charest has been holding on to power by governing like a Liberal..Not to say that is a good thing,but he seems reluctant to take a straight up right wing agenda.

He straddles the centre and leans to the right.

A couple years ago,the PLQ let off a trial balloon,toying with the idea to make mandatory waiting periods for women wanting an abortion.

Clearly,it was an attempt to quash a woman's right to choose.

This was INCREDIBLY unpopular...So unpopular that within 72 hours,they did a complete about face and Charest had to face the cameras and declare that abortion is a right.

Again,a conservative agenda so unpopular that he did an immediate 180..I don't remember a quicker flip flop.

I have to make it very clear...I was NOT denying the FACT that there are millions of progressives across Canada--including Alberta.

But am I really that off the mark when I say there are MORE progressives in Quebec than in Alberta?

And of course different regions have different political allegiances.

Quebec's conservative bone is and always has been concentrated around the Quebec City region.

Thankfully,when it comes to who decides the government we get here,it's Montreal and the surrounding area.

And because of that,if the orange tide becomes even stronger in 2 years,Quebec Solidaire will be an official party in the National Assembly.

As it stands,the QS are the NDP with a pro-sovereignty stance.

alan smithee wrote:

This is why I never voted for the PQ.

When Levesque died,the party lost it's identity.

The last election,Charest won because he went up against a real dud..(Quebec's answer to Iggy)...Andre Boisclair.

When he was chosen the new leader of the PQ,I called it right away..I said he'd fail and he did--miserably.

I'm also not delusional..The PQ have not been a left wing party since the end of the 80's.

They're like the Liberals,they like to play both sides of the fence which is a proven losing formula.

Charest has been holding on to power by governing like a Liberal..Not to say that is a good thing,but he seems reluctant to take a straight up right wing agenda.

He's reluctant because the unions, social advocacy groups and the general population have put him to task on anything and everything he's tried.

Quote:

I have to make it very clear...I was NOT denying the FACT that there are millions of progressives across Canada--including Alberta.

Alan, save for Manitoba, Saskatchwan and Alberta -- (the only province with any sizable population), the conservatives did not capture the popular vote.  Harper got his Majority by the vote-splitting that took place in the GTA and the GVRD.  Nothing more. 18 of those pick-ups could have been easily avoided had there not been such a split down the middle.  There are at least six ridings in Ontario alone that the Tories took with less than a thousand votes, some of them, with barely 100 votes.  Three of the six Tory holds in Québec won with a much smaller lead this time around.  

Harper knows this.  Of course, he'll act out his ultra-right wing agenda but that will have dire consequences, because he's got three factions with this new Majority, the Reformers out west, the former PC folks in Ontario, and the new Canadian vote, which can be just as fickle as any Quebec voter.  All three have very divergent agendas that do not always gel together, and it will eventually cause rifts in the party, with some of the more ambitious ones (like Tony Clement) will stake out their party leader aspirations.

If you're going to blame anything, blame our collective First-past-the-post system, which is a system, BTW, neither one of the three dominant parties at the Québec National Assembly are quick to rid themselves of.

Quote:

But am I really that off the mark when I say there are MORE progressives in Quebec than in Alberta?

There are more progressives in Ontario than in Québec (well, at least those of eligible voters who voted).  There are more progressives than conservatives in Ontario, but so what?  Ontario is just one of ten provinces and three territories.  There is a lot of common ground.  Progressives are a huge family in Canada.  Plus, at least 35% of eligible voters didn't participate in this election, so to quantify which province is more progressive than the other is beside the point.

Quote:

As it stands,the QS are the NDP with a pro-sovereignty stance.

I don't know if it's so much pro-sovereignty, than being pro-Québec nationalist (which isn't necessarily synonymous).  Québec Solidaire has always struck me as a party who doesn't believe in rattling sabres like the PQ.  Sovereignty isn't so much a goal, rather than a tool they are open to use if possible to achieve their social democratic goals.  Which is something I respect, even though I am a federalist.  I believe that is the NDP's position too.  You're right to think they would work together.  But I think it's a bit presumtuous to assume that means a referendum on sovereignty in the forseeable future (or the need for one ever).

You might never think this, but I see Québéc re-enfranchising themselves into the shape of what is to come.  60.38% of Canadians did not vote for the Conservatives.  Québec has an incredible opportunity through the NDP to not only re-assert their vision of Québec, but of the entire progressive movement in all of Canada.  Even to redefine what Canadian federalism means.

Now is not the time to retreat and sulk into a corner.  There's a lot of work to be done.  Harper can't keep the muzzle on the Weasel (Kenney) and the Screaming Bear (Baird) forever.

alan smithee wrote:

There's alot of Canadians out there who said No,Thank You to Harper as well.

We're on the same team...We share the same goals.

I think the Conservatives did a good job of avoiding social conservatism and quashing it when the crazies spoke up which is why they were able to hold their vote in BC and make serious gains in Ontario. In fact I think the whole Trost thing was a calculated triangulation move designed to show the social conservatives that they have a voice and delude social liberals into thinking Harper is one of them, which is why the Conservatives were able to come up the middle and win a lot of suburban and urban ridings they wouldn't have won in English Canada otherwise. If they let the crazies out of the bag then the 'blue' liberals who supported them in middle/upper-middle class ridings in suburban Vancouver and Toronto and smaller mid-sized cities would abandon them.

I think its undeniable that there's more social conservatism in English Canada than in Quebec, because there is no base of evangelical Christians in Quebec and ultra montane Catholicism went out of style in the 60s and 70s, but even in English Canada such thinking is a small minority and Harper will need to tred lightly. Especially since people are becoming more irrelegious. I think I remember reading that in BC agnostics/atheists make up a plurality of the population (the only province including Quebec where this is true), which doesn't even include all of the lapsed others. He has a coalition of conservatives and blue liberals, he needs to remember that and keep the bible thumpers in the closet, otherwise it will fall apart.

That's an interesting analysis, VanKid (in post #35).

In the US, there is a very significant percentage of people "in the middle" who are repelled by social conservativism but are very attracted to fiscal conservativism.  If the Republicans can, as you say, "keep the bible thumpers in the closet" like they did in the 2010 mid-term elections, then they may very well establish a lasting governing majority. It's interesting to me that a similar dynamic may be at play in Canada.

alan smithee wrote:

The new right wing party doesn't have much of a snow ball's chance given the current political climate in Quebec.

The next provincial election will almost certainly see a PQ majority... [...]

As it stands,a hard right agenda is a fringe agenda in La Belle Province.

But Pauline Marois's conclusion is that she should seek alliances on the right:

[url=http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-quebecoise/... reaches out to Legault[/url]

I didn't notice her reaching out to Québec solidaire, or the trade unions, or the student organizations...

Is she stupid? Does she understand nothing about what happened last Monday? Or is she, like others, terrified that the workers, farmers, youth, and poor of Québec may be more committed to fighting against Harper (obviously her class ally) than for whatever phony kind of sovereignty the PQ has on offer these days?

I have long been convinced that this party cannot be salvaged. The sooner it disappears from the Québec scene, the better. Let's see if QS can show some healthier political instincts than this.

I would love to have Duceppe as head of the PQ, but I doubt it will happen now. I think he'll probably retire.

Next to Marois?

Absolutely.

There is a very strong and compelling 'informal rule' of politics that the PQ could not improve its fortunes by replacing Marois and her weak appeal with Duceppe.

I would think that Quebecois still have a great fondness for and trust of Duceppe. But he is traumatically damaged goods. And not simply or even primarily because he lost and lost so badly. That was just the coup de grace. So switching to Duceppe would just fan the flames, regardless of the fact he is better liked and regarded than Marois.

Obviously, Quebec civil society has a different dynamic with its politicians, but I seriously doubt it is different enough for Duceppe as PQ leader to not bump up very hard against that 'informal rule'. Duceppe knows this, and will I think not seriously entertain positioning himself for 'un-retiring' from anything except elder statesman role.

Not to mention that it was obvious even before the election that he is tired. And then acted like a cranky old man, forced to turn to the entertaining other old man. And where is the energy alan in the would-be drafters of Duceppe?

It remians to be seen whether the remnants of the Bloc are a spent political force. But it looks to me like there is little doubt Duceppe is.

Good article, U. Thanks!

Great article.

Speaking to family and colleagues since the election,surprisingly,there are many anglophones like myself who now see sovereignty as an option.

There is a general wave of malaise starting to rise.

In fact,the front page of Le Devoir brought up the 'Americanization of Canada' and asked the question 'Is Harper George Bush?'

In La Presse,a story was written about journalists in 'English Canada' proposing to marginalize Quebec and asking the Cons to reduce Quebec ministers..Basically make them all backbenchers....PUNISH Quebec for the resounding rejection of Harper.

This is all music to my ears,everything is going in motion where interest in sovereignty will no doubt explode to the levels they once were in the late 60's and through the 70's into the early 80's and the early 1990's.

In the last 2 referendums,anglophones and allophones kept the vote below 50%.

The malaise and maginalization and alienation of Quebec,the deep divisions that are going to open up like a severed jugular,will see traditionally apathetic or  'non merci' voters voting in favour of cutting ties with Canada and will get an easy YES majority well over 60%.

Quebec has changed since the election..Where even Quebec anglophones are very angry with the outcome.

I look forward to June 24....It may well be one doozy of a Fete St-Jean.