Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Once again, your fear of Francophones is exagerrated, overdramatic, and above all, unjustified. It is really difficult to even have a logical debate on the topic of Quebec when perspectives are so warped by fear and prejudice.
And once again I have no fear of Francophones so ergo; also no actual exaggeration.
What is it about me testifying to the manifested displayed dislike of English Canada by some Quebecers being in any way less important or less obvious than the supposed dislike the ROC has for Quebec? Why is describing provable known history of bad behaviour unjustified?
Where were you during the Quebec Crisis? Did you travel to Expo to endure rude treatment by many? Have you been told to your face to not speak English while the street is full of Quebecers celebrating St. Jean Baptiste day? Have you been told you must saddle up and fly people from all over Canada to the province of Quebec when meetings of staff were scheduled for all Provinces but Quebecers would only attend those held in Quebec?
There is nothing warped about a perspective gained from over 50 years of events either witnessed or experienced personally. You don't like your "perspective" challenged, I get that. Tough noogies.
People with my longevity and history of forced involvement with die-hard separatists will not be posting on these boards in any numbers so you're not likely to be overburdened in any case.
Throw another strawman out there Hobbs as the "fear and prejudice" one has been flogged to death from only one side of that stupid fence you're building. You are no more interested in a logical debate than anyone who suggests there has been failures of reasoning emanating from only one side of this long simmering nonsense.
At the end of the day - If we are talking about what if scenarios there are many of those..What would the borders of it look like, what would the health of the economy be once it assumed the debt it would be required to pick up, what would happen if it were not a recipient of Federal transfers it currently gets..What would happen Canadian companies Hq'd in Quebec that would want no part of a new country of Quebec.. All the deals for some of these companies I can think of that have agreements with the Feds like Air Canada would probably go out the window as the majority of AC's operation is not in Quebec its in the R.O.C...... Some speak of GDP but what would happen to those in Quebec who didn't vote for separation - I mean at no point has support been greater than 50 percent so in an independant Quebec - how many would actually stay in the new country and support it - how many would leave and what would happen to its GDP then.. What about matters of Defense, currency etc etc.. These are uncomfortable questions of divorce but there is a big difference - unlike a divorce where it is clear there is one side and the other - in the case of Quebec that one side has many within that would want no part of it and in present times it is actually a greater half..
I guess the question is - what is the appetite for seperatism in Quebec right now in 2014... Is it 40 percent support, 45 percent etc etc... We can go around talking about where Quebec would rank in the world when it comes to maple syrup production and what its GDP looks like now - but what would it look like one year or two years or 5 years after separation..
These are all valid questions. How much better off would Quebec be and for how many of its inhabitants and which one's.
Montreal is the birthplace of the separatist movement and is consistently more separatist in elections then either Quebec City or Gatineau. Moreover, UN jurisprudence on the subject does not support that notion so it's a bit of a federalist fantasy. Even if, say, the West Island could separate, it probably wouldn't do anything more then threaten as the people living there depend on the rest of the metro area economically, there is no political umbrella under which all of those municipalities could act together, none of them are majority native Anglophone despite the impression you might get, and at the end of the day people are very connected in a myriad of ways with the rest of the city and province. At the same time, the Cree have reconciled with the Quebec government so the situation with them would be pretty different from 1995. So all of this argument it moot. It may have been relevant in 1995 but if it happened this year? Nah, I don't believe it would go down that way in 2014.
Has the situation or would the situation be resolved for First nations in Quebec?
At the end of the day - If we are talking about what if scenarios there are many of those..What would the borders of it look like, what would the health of the economy be once it assumed the debt it would be required to pick up, what would happen if it were not a recipient of Federal transfers it currently gets..What would happen Canadian companies Hq'd in Quebec that would want no part of a new country of Quebec.. All the deals for some of these companies I can think of that have agreements with the Feds like Air Canada would probably go out the window as the majority of AC's operation is not in Quebec its in the R.O.C...... Some speak of GDP but what would happen to those in Quebec who didn't vote for separation - I mean at no point has support been greater than 50 percent so in an independant Quebec - how many would actually stay in the new country and support it - how many would leave and what would happen to its GDP then.. What about matters of Defense, currency etc etc.. These are uncomfortable questions of divorce but there is a big difference - unlike a divorce where it is clear there is one side and the other - in the case of Quebec that one side has many within that would want no part of it and in present times it is actually a greater half..
I guess the question is - what is the appetite for seperatism in Quebec right now in 2014... Is it 40 percent support, 45 percent etc etc... We can go around talking about where Quebec would rank in the world when it comes to maple syrup production and what its GDP looks like now - but what would it look like one year or two years or 5 years after separation..
These are all valid questions. How much better off would Quebec be and for how many of its inhabitants and which one's.
Those certainly are valid questions, and they are the same questions that Canada faced as she tried to assert independence from Britain. More recently we can look at the peaceful "divorce" of the Czech Republic and Slovakia which also faced the same questions. In both the case of Canada and Slovakia things went splendidly. In fact, there hasn't been a modern day "divorce" between first world nations that went poorly or resulted in an economic catastrophe.
Financial doomsday scenarios aside, the purpose of Quebec is not about economics. It is about culture. The economics perspective is relevant but misses the point of what the entire movement is all about. It is about a political arrangement that works better on paper than in reality. It is about a regular guy from Laval feeling like a foreigner in his own country. It is about having a totally different outlook on life, culture, religion, language, money, and politics that most of the Anglo majority doesn't even try to understand. Even if the economic prospects for an independent Quebec were immediate bankruptcy, a strong seperatist movement would still persist.
Those certainly are valid questions, and they are the same questions that Canada faced as she tried to assert independence from Britain. More recently we can look at the peaceful "divorce" of the Czech Republic and Slovakia which also faced the same questions. In both the case of Canada and Slovakia things went splendidly. In fact, there hasn't been a modern day "divorce" between first world nations that went poorly or resulted in an economic catastrophe.
Financial doomsday scenarios aside, the purpose of Quebec is not about economics. It is about culture. The economics perspective is relevant but misses the point of what the entire movement is all about. It is about a political arrangement that works better on paper than in reality. It is about a regular guy from Laval feeling like a foreigner in his own country. It is about having a totally different outlook on life, culture, religion, language, money, and politics that most of the Anglo majority doesn't even try to understand. Even if the economic prospects for an independent Quebec were immediate bankruptcy, a strong seperatist movement would still persist.
I didn't just bring up economic questions though did I? There are many cultures in Quebec and a solid number of Fracophones within Quebec who don't want separation so no I don't think those questions have been adequately answered or addressed.. What about the First Nations etc..
The economic questions are valid questions and also need or would need to be addressed - you'd need to be living in a fantasy to think otherwise.. Would Quebec be better off economically on its own and would it be able to stave off a massive exodus of citizens/corporations etc... What would its borders look like - how would partition look like - would there be partition or wouldn't there be - how would International law be applied in this case.
You cite an example of the Czech Republic and Slovakia but are they parallel cases to the situation in Canada.. How are they similar, how are they different.. How did International laws apply to those countries and how would they apply in Quebec.
You say even if immedediate bankruptcy would ensue there would still be a strong seperatist movement and while I agree with you that this would be the case - the truth is that strong seperatist movement has never been greater than half of the Province so alas... the conclusion you draw that the union works better on paper than in reality does not bear fruit since the vote for union has historically always been upheld within Quebec... Its ebbed and flowed but about 40 percent of Quebecers would vote for secession today - not enough so we are just speculating but since many like to do that than lets speculate and play what if across the spectrum and not just peachy and agreeable points to you that everything in Quebec would remain the same after secession when we all know that wouldn't be the case!
Most in Quebec don't feel like foreigners in their own land when they have never voted for secession but if there was a vote for secession and it actually happened, how many would than truly feel like foreigners and what would happen to them - or don't they matter in your estimation? Apparently 60 percent of Quebecers don't matter to you right now..
What is a likely scenario for Quebec 2 or 3 or 5 or 10 years after she secedes and who would still be there and within what borders?
Trust me - I'm not asking you specifically... As a matter of fact i'm more interested in the opinions of those who are actually citizens of the country but you will continue to provide your 'expertise' nonetheless...
And once again I have no fear of Francophones so ergo; also no actual exaggeration.
What is it about me testifying to the manifested displayed dislike of English Canada by some Quebecers being in any way less important or less obvious than the supposed dislike the ROC has for Quebec? Why is describing provable known history of bad behaviour unjustified?
Where were you during the Quebec Crisis? Did you travel to Expo to endure rude treatment by many? Have you been told to your face to not speak English while the street is full of Quebecers celebrating St. Jean Baptiste day? Have you been told you must saddle up and fly people from all over Canada to the province of Quebec when meetings of staff were scheduled for all Provinces but Quebecers would only attend those held in Quebec?
There is nothing warped about a perspective gained from over 50 years of events either witnessed or experienced personally. You don't like your "perspective" challenged, I get that. Tough noogies.
People with my longevity and history of forced involvement with die-hard separatists will not be posting on these boards in any numbers so you're not likely to be overburdened in any case.
Throw another strawman out there Hobbs as the "fear and prejudice" one has been flogged to death from only one side of that stupid fence you're building. You are no more interested in a logical debate than anyone who suggests there has been failures of reasoning emanating from only one side of this long simmering nonsense.
Frankly Brusan, I have no interest in exchanging stories about personal experiences.
Anglophones in Montreal are perhaps the best treated minority in the world. They have ready access to schools, hospitals, and all government services in their language. They can walk into a francophone owned store and get service in English. They also control a disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Meanwhile a francophone in Ottawa, let alone Toronto or Vancouver, cannot by any strech of the imagination expect to be met with this level of comfort. He cannot walk into the hospital in Saskatoon or Halifax and readily be helped in French. He cannot walk into a store and communicate with the salesperson in hislanguage. As a result, the francophone in most of Canada has no choice but to assimilate. Otherwise he remains a foreigner in his own country. There lies the problem; a Quebecois feels like he is in his own country in Quebec and not in other areas of Canada. Ontario and British Columbia might as well be part of the US from his perspective
I sympathize with your mistreatment at the hands of the Quebecois. Yet rationally speaking, there will be at least 3 angry anglophones for every angry Quebecois simply due to the much larger Anglo population. If these two populations can not find a way to work out a compromise then eventually Canada will fall apart. Sooner or later the question arises: Does a compromise that adequately satisfies both parties even exist? Right now Canada is hovering between 'yes' and 'no' but at some point it has to choose which path to take.
I didn't just bring up economic questions though did I? There are many cultures in Quebec and a solid number of Fracophones within Quebec who don't want separation so no I don't think those questions have been adequately answered or addressed.. What about the First Nations etc..
The economic questions are valid questions and also need or would need to be addressed - you'd need to be living in a fantasy to think otherwise.. Would Quebec be better off economically on its own and would it be able to stave off a massive exodus of citizens/corporations etc... What would its borders look like - how would partition look like - would there be partition or wouldn't there be - how would International law be applied in this case.
You cite an example of the Czech Republic and Slovakia but are they parallel cases to the situation in Canada.. How are they similar, how are they different.. How did International laws apply to those countries and how would they apply in Quebec.
You say even if immedediate bankruptcy would ensue there would still be a strong seperatist movement and while I agree with you that this would be the case - the truth is that strong seperatist movement has never been greater than half of the Province so alas... the conclusion you draw that the union works better on paper than in reality does not bear fruit since the vote for union has historical always been upheld within Quebec... Most in Quebec don't feel like foreigners in their own land when they have never voted for secession but if there was a vote for secession and it actually happened, how many would than truly feel like foreigners and what would happen to them - or don't they matter in your estimation?
What is a likely scenario for Quebec 2 o 3 or 5 or 10 years after she secedes and who would still be there and within what borders?
Yes, those are valid questions. An independent Quebec would loook very much the same as it does today.
Yes, those are valid questions. An independent Quebec would loook very much the same as it does today.
Reallly - because you say so lol. How do you rationalize this answer.. Rather simplistic answers to imminently complicated questions from the gamut of cultural, economic and legal standpoints..
I think Salmond also had rather simplistic answers to complicated questions...
Reallly - because you say so lol. How do you rationalize this answer.. Rather simplistic answers to imminently complicated questions from the gamut of cultural, economic and legal standpoints..
I think Salmond also had rather simplistic answers to complicated questions...
Fusion, you asked my opinion, and I gave it in a short and concise reply. I am not an economist. If you disagree, I respect your opinion 100%. Let's continue to have an intelligent discussion.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
