Motion to recognize "Quebecers" a nation--any thoughts? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-25-2006, 10:02 PM   #16
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ladywithspinninghead


It's not logic, it's the Websters dictionary
And again, it's not that they "have" a nation, it's that they are *considered* a nation.

And the First Nations are considered a nation by people, hence the word "Nation" in their title

So, the English would be Third Nations?

I just think the whole issue of Quebec nationalism is outdated and silly. Respect the past, yes, but get on with it, too. Some of the biggest problems in the world right now are stemming from the very growth of nationalism, where borders and isolationism are replacing good ideas.

The other thing that bugs me is how it's surfaced this week, not from some organic place or yearning, but from a purely tactical and political motivation.
__________________

__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 10:18 PM   #17
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 08:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ladywithspinninghead
Harper's more elaborate plan of decentralization for the entire country
Could someone briefly explain what this consists of? I'm not sure I understand.
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 11-25-2006, 11:39 PM   #18
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

Could someone briefly explain what this consists of? I'm not sure I understand.
Basically it's akin to the argument for states' rights in the US.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 11-26-2006, 12:01 AM   #19
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
angelordevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Inside a sound
Posts: 5,827
Local Time: 03:36 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

Could someone briefly explain what this consists of? I'm not sure I understand.
It’s complicated, but basically Harper and his government believe the provincial governments should have more power in administering social programs–instead of a unified federal mandate across the country.

His approach is tied to the idea that there is “fiscal imbalance” between the provinces and Ottawa. Years ago, the previous Liberal government cut back on what’s called “transfer payments” to the provinces in order to fix a deficit problem at the national level. These payments fuelled health-care and other programs that defined the Canadian fabric.

Now that the federal government has run surpluses at a national level, there’s a tension in the country between those who insist provincial tax cuts are a better way to return those funds to individual citizens and those who think a strong national framework is still vital.

Harper, in the former group, would likely argue that his approach not only gives provinces more control, but it would also dull the appetite for separatism in Quebec (and even Alberta).

The big problem with decentralization is that all provinces are not equal, in terms of their respective tax base. While the stronger ones might be able to go it alone on major programs like health-care, poorer provinces would unquestionably suffer.

It’s the kind of issue that calls into question the idea of Canada’s national identity, values, and shared responsibilities for the greater good.
__________________
angelordevil is offline  
Old 11-26-2006, 11:21 AM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ladywithspinninghead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 4,634
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by angelordevil



So, the English would be Third Nations?

I just think the whole issue of Quebec nationalism is outdated and silly. Respect the past, yes, but get on with it, too. Some of the biggest problems in the world right now are stemming from the very growth of nationalism, where borders and isolationism are replacing good ideas.
Sure, that would be great! Since my mom is English and my father is French-Canadian I would be a "Second" and "Third Nation"!

The idealist in me does agree with your take on nationalism and Quebec - those were also Trudeau's reasons for not recognizing Quebec either. But that's how Quebeckers feel and if it will appease the soft nationalists and keep our country intact I'm all for it.
What remains to be seen however is if Quebeckers will embrace it or not...and whether this will be the end of the story.

I don't think nationalism will ever die though. Look at the "progressive" Europeans - even they're unwilling to hand over a lot of power to the EU.
__________________
ladywithspinninghead is offline  
Old 11-28-2006, 11:21 AM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 03:36 PM
So the motion passed last night.

Thanks Harper for muddying the waters even more. Besides the definition of nation, everyone is wondering who the hell the Quebecois are? The answers are varying from original descendents of French settlers, all Quebecers or only French speaking Canadians or to my favourite spoken by our PM, " the Quebecois know who they are". WTF?!?
If someone gave me that kind of answer to a question, I would think they were joking but of course, politicians can give bullshit answers and it's perfectly acceptable.

A cabinet minister stepped down over the issue and one Conservative abstained. I love how our democracy works, crack the whip, vote against party line and get ousted from caucus. Threats work.

I look forward to the next few months and years as other groups like the First Nations, Albertans, Newfoundlanders, Chinese and so on seek "nation" status. Plus wonder how the Separtists use this as leverage to promote their cause.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 11-28-2006, 06:35 PM   #22
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 03:06 PM
Stephen Harper, to me, is, essentially, trying to mock Canadian separatism by equating the identity of the "Québeçois" as you would the indigenous peoples of Canada. In other words, the Québec "nation" would be no different than the "First Nations." Since Québec already wields an awful lot of autonomy and special statuses within Canada, Harper is essentially able to confuse the situation without having to change anything.

Practically, however, it certainly won't placate Québeçois separatism, but it styled to make these separatists seem increasingly unreasonable, and, hence, it would give Harper justification to ignore them and stop giving Québec any future special treatment.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 11-28-2006, 08:28 PM   #23
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Ormus
it would give Harper justification to ignore them and stop giving Québec any future special treatment.
Actually, I think the divisiveness of this issue will give him the leverage he needs to further his plan to decentralize federal control across all provinces.

At a point to come when this "nation" thing goes the way of "distinct society" (recognition only, no special powers yet Meech Lake still fell apart) then the only route to avoid another referendum will be to grant a new level of provincial autonomy for Quebec - and all other provinces for it to pass - all in the name of preserving Canadian unity.

Very risky and high chance of completely backfiring unless (and until) the rest of Canada is willing to acknowledge Quebec's uniqueness - so hopefully the commons motion will suffice.

As a born and bred Montrealer who packed up and headed down the 401 after the last referendum, I see both sides of the issue and only hope that Harper plays his hand very carefully now that the cards have been dealt.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 11-28-2006, 10:55 PM   #24
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 03:36 PM
Our wonderful PM is now finally reopening debate on same sex marriage which we had already put to bed. I hate Harper!!

AliEnvy, could you explain to me what is missing from Quebec that separation from Canada would provide them? Is it simply an independent voice at the table or their own hockey team? Cause all I see is lose-lose for everyone if there was a separate Quebec.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 11-28-2006, 11:29 PM   #25
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 02:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AliEnvy
(recognition only, no special powers yet Meech Lake still fell apart)
Quebec has to take the majority of the blame for Meech Lake (along with slow premiers) because it was their re-insertion of s. 33 clause into legislation following SCC's decision in Ford that completely eroded any good feelings English Canada may have had (and they did initially).
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 11-29-2006, 12:18 AM   #26
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:06 PM
For sure...the nicety of the distinct society clause didn't really mean anything (which is why English Canada was initially ok with it) without the means to protect the "distinct society" - AND they actually had the gall to use the notwithstanding clause on Bill 178 which rightfully pissed off English Canada once again.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 11-29-2006, 12:30 AM   #27
Refugee
 
AliEnvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 2,320
Local Time: 07:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by trevster2k
AliEnvy, could you explain to me what is missing from Quebec that separation from Canada would provide them?
The same self-governing control that all the other provinces want except that the other provinces aren't able to manipulate the debate into the same kind of us vs. them scenario due to language barriers...and of course, the masses tend to vote with their hearts, not minds.
__________________
AliEnvy is offline  
Old 11-29-2006, 12:38 AM   #28
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 01:06 PM
only 24 years after officially cutting ties with the UK...

more and more it looks like canada will become a not-so-united kingdom itself.

canada
consisting of:
quebec
alberta
and...err the rest? what could we call the rest of us... england2?
__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 11-29-2006, 02:17 AM   #29
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 03:36 PM
Well, I'm not from BC but British Columbia and Alberta have recently decided to see if they can align professional associations so there are no differences in qualifications between the provinces. Thus allowing employees to work in both provinces using the same certification. So I'm fairly certain that if Alberta buggered off, BC would go with them.

Maybe we could build a wall or something..

Thanks for the response Ali! I thought it was something else that I was not in the loop about. But Alberta and Newfoundland have people working on the hearts and minds thing too, it seems so effective in garnering attention from the feds. But they aren't too effective.......yet.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 11-29-2006, 12:19 PM   #30
Blue Crack Addict
 
RavenBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The majestic Canuckian wilderness
Posts: 17,103
Local Time: 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by angelordevil


Using that logic, shouldn't the First Nations and English in Quebec have their own mini-nations? Neither of these groups are "Québécois." It gets awfully confusing, and that's the problem.
Rick Mercer and 22 minutes had some fun with that last night.

I find this whole thing very confusing and I still don't quite understand it. I know it came pretty well out of nowhere.
__________________

__________________
RavenBlue is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com