U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Is Quebec Independence a Legitimate Movement?
Yes 147 65.04%
No 79 34.96%
Voters: 226. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-16-2015, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Shawinigan
144 posts, read 123,218 times
Reputation: 129

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
A refreshingly sober post that captures exactly how I feel about this.
What you are expressing is pretty much what was the mood prior the constitution of 1867 where pronvinces were more independant political states working between each other, until a central entity was built to manage everyone for or against the will of everyones. I am not a specialist, but I know that Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were not entousiast about the confederation (Ontario not sure). The unity and equity between provinces were nobel ideas, but the reality is that centralised power is not really reflecting provinces needs. provinces endup competing against each other and the central power is acting toward the best voter capital. Quebec is not well positionned in that system. I share the view Honoré Mercier, at the end of his carreer, admiting that power was taken from provinces and Quebec should become independant.

If all provinces would be associated, and that association was called Canada, the situation would very different. Unfortunately this cannot happen unless independance is achieved and that maybe after that... Harper wanted strongly to abolish the senate...impossible..pure utopism, so with all the good will there are limits set by the political system in place, I think.

Quebecers too are not that hot about independance compare to unity, but the ongoing conflicts of view persist and media propaganda to people confusion. Maybe Canada will endup kicking Quebec outside, I
would understand that wery well too.

Last edited by Guytar1220; 01-16-2015 at 08:53 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Shawinigan
144 posts, read 123,218 times
Reputation: 129
L
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnathanc View Post
To me, the ideal situation would be if we can find a way to work together as one nation within Canada so that everyone is happy or at least content. I don't mean to sound cliché or idealist because nothing is perfect but I think one nation working together from east to west can create a "sum if better than it's parts" situation - if that's what people want. If we remain too fragmented as a nation, then perhaps this approach won't be optimal, especially if there is constant political bickering with major cultural & economic differences that draw wedges and reinforce instability of sorts more like in the EU but much less so in the US.

On the other hand, Quebec may choose to not be part of this union if it does not believe it can achieve the rights and recognition it deserves as part of Canada and would rather stand on its own. In this case, I would respect that decision with no hostility as someone coming from the Anglo world if there was a clear majority within Quebec, which there currently isn't mind you. There would be no point to stand in the way if the "will" was really that strong.
See I strongly believe that Quebec should, could and would tie very closely with the ROC as independant, once Quebec entirely assume its power & responsibility on his own, then and only then (I believe) new cooperation on shared matters will be stronger and no more thinted by constitutionnal partisan tangent.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:10 PM
 
Location: Toronto
13,666 posts, read 13,972,896 times
Reputation: 4537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guytar1220 View Post

Quebecers too are not that hot about independance compare to unity, but the ongoing conflicts of view persist and media propaganda to people confusion. Maybe Canada will endup kicking Quebec outside, I
would understand that wery well too.
I don't really think its going to happen - I think on either side the extreme views are in the minority.. I think most Canadians including Quebecers are more moderate.. I respect Quebec as a distinct society and embrace the fact that we have distinct societies in Canada - it makes for a bit of a rougher ride but in the end I think civility, respect and a desire to work together will overcome. It also makes the country a whole lot more interesting to have differences. For every argument made that Quebec would be stronger as an independent nation - the same argument could be made that it would be stronger within a united Canada. Its the same for the R.O.C - for every argument they say that Canada would be stronger without Quebec - parallel arguments can be made that we are stronger together.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:14 PM
 
Location: Toronto
13,666 posts, read 13,972,896 times
Reputation: 4537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guytar1220 View Post
L

See I strongly believe that Quebec should, could and would tie very closely with the ROC as independant, once Quebec entirely assume its power & responsibility on his own, then and only then (I believe) new cooperation on shared matters will be stronger and no more thinted by constitutionnal partisan tangent.
The partisan tangent belongs to those with extreme views though - this doesn't constitute the majority either in Quebec or the R.O.C.. If the balance shifts than that would need to be revisited.. I do agree with Acajack though, if we don't keep working on it than the minority could be swayed in time to the majority.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:22 PM
 
Location: Shawinigan
144 posts, read 123,218 times
Reputation: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
I don't really think its going to happen - I think on either side the extreme views are in the minority.. I think most Canadians including Quebecers are more moderate.. I respect Quebec as a distinct society and embrace the fact that we have distinct societies in Canada - it makes for a bit of a rougher ride but in the end I think civility, respect and a desire to work together will overcome. It also makes the country a whole lot more interesting to have differences.
Agree with pretty much all of what you said except that Quebec is not a distinct society within the actual Canadian constitution. I am not seeking to be pessimist, but I think that the healthy "distinct status" quebec need will not be possible, even with all the will possible, I think the political system is the limit and I also believe that this 'fake' distinct status will endup either push Quebec outside Canada or with time, will endup reducing it to a state 'folklore' where Quebecers will abandon its cultural differences.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:31 PM
 
Location: Toronto
13,666 posts, read 13,972,896 times
Reputation: 4537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guytar1220 View Post
Agree with pretty much all of what you said except that Quebec is not a distinct society within the actual Canadian constitution. I am not seeking to be pessimist, but I think that the healthy "distinct status" quebec need will not be possible, even with all the will possible, I think the political system is the limit and I also believe that this 'fake' distinct status will endup either push Quebec outside Canada or with time, will endup reducing it to a state 'folklore' where Quebecers will abandon its cultural differences.
We can look to politics or the Constitution to define us or just look to what we are and have been in practice. Look at it this way, does the Constitution regard any Province's status as being distinct from the other? I don't believe Ontario is granted distinct status in the Constitution from say Alberta or Newfoundland yet their are societal and cultural differences. People just like to lump the "R.O.C" together as though we are this unified anglo force that is inseperable and that isn't necessarily the case at all..With that said, I as an Ontarian living within a Province with a deep history in this country do not see myself as requiring that constitutional distinction from other provinces. Is this a weakness on my part not requiring this?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Shawinigan
144 posts, read 123,218 times
Reputation: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusion2 View Post
The partisan tangent belongs to those with extreme views though - this doesn't constitute the majority either in Quebec or the R.O.C.. If the balance shifts than that would need to be revisited.. I do agree with Acajack though, if we don't keep working on it than the minority could be swayed in time to the majority.
When I refer to partisan tangent, I am refering to politicians that waste Canadian money, time and energy by making orientated actions toward unity, instead of working on real issues and trying to really solve cause of the seperation will.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 10:13 PM
 
Location: Toronto
13,666 posts, read 13,972,896 times
Reputation: 4537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guytar1220 View Post
When I refer to partisan tangent, I am refering to politicians that waste Canadian money, time and energy by making orientated actions toward unity, instead of working on real issues and trying to really solve cause of the seperation will.
Oh that i'll agree with.. Politicians always waste our money and time doing lord knows what and for lord knows what reasons.. Working on real issues for the people of Canada - since when have they engaged in this lol.... When I think of politicians, I think of that MadTV skit, 'lowered expectations'

Actually Quebecers stand out in my mind as the people most likely to give their politicians the boot fast when they're not happy with em

Last edited by fusion2; 01-16-2015 at 10:36 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 10:32 PM
 
Location: New York Area
29,939 posts, read 12,959,098 times
Reputation: 24782
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevySpoons View Post
That event is still studied among Westminster constitutional scholars. From what I can tell, there is no consensus: some feel that the Australian GG was exercising his constitutional powers; some felt that he was going against conventional usage of those powers.
My recollection of that era, albeit dimmed by time, was that democracies were collapsing left and right. Even in the U.S. Nixon was speaking of democracy's failings. India was under totalitarian rule. About the only democracies left were the U.S., Canada, Britain, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, France, the Scandinavian countries, Japan, West Germany, Switzerland, Israel and, barely, Italy. Countries that are now democracies that were under dictatorship included Spain (albeit emerging in 1975), Portugal, South Korea, India, Indonesia, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and all the other Eastern Bloc countries.

The GG had asked Whitlam to commit to early elections, which he refused to do. He had either one or two years left of a three year mandate and their were rumblings of Whitlam taking a Castro-lite posture. As the next post under yours correctly points out, normally it's the confidence of the HOC that counts. In this case, I believe it was the subtext of possible authoritarian or dictatorial rule Whitlam wanted to take Australia further left than it wanted to go.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevySpoons View Post
The closest we've ever come was the King-Byng Affair.
Canada recently had a near-miss with another King-Byng. When Harper's party increased its share of the minority government in the 2008 elections, the other three parties (or 2 1/2 of them) entered into a tentative coalition agreement. Except for the Borden WW I coalition Canada has not used coalition government, where members of parties other than the one with the plurality sit on the Cabinet. The second-to-last GG instead took Harper's "advice" to prorogue Parliament. During the prorogation the coalition fell apart. The thought of a government depending upon a separatist party not to pull the plug is truly frightening. That is one reason that Communist or far-right parties are almost never invited into coalitions in Continental Europe or Israel, where proportional representation and its Yin-Yang accompaniment, coalitions are the norm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevySpoons View Post
Well, Canada is a constitutional monarchy, and Parliament has done away with the death penalty, so unless Parliament re-enacts the death penalty, we won't see the Queen passing such a bill any time soon.
I was being facetious. I don't expect even the PQ to ask France to supply guillotines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Migratory Chicken View Post
As I understand it, Australia, having an elected and powerful senate, is an outlier among Westminster-type systems. Westminster constitutional tradition presupposes an elected House of Commons placing its confidence in the government, and a House of Lords whose relevance has declined and which is now in the best case a "chamber of sober second thought". So tradition is largely silent about what happens if there is a conflict between a House of Commons and a Senate, both of which claim their mandate from the people. This can completely paralyse the legislative process.
The closest Canada came was when the Senate more or less required Mulroney to go to the polls in 1988 before giving assent to the Canadian American Free Trade Agreement ("CAFTA"), the predecessor to NAFTA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
As an Anglo Quebeker i dont care if you keep or abolish your language laws and its enforcement bureau i just thought it would be a very good gesture to show that Quebec is trying to find a way to work with Canada.As for your independence its not up to Canada to give it to you its up to the francophones to take it,elect in your separatist party, have your referendum on separation and then separate,a course of action that up till now has unfortunately been all torque no traction.
Imo quebec and Canada are growing further apart to the point i no longer see any relevence to Quebec remaining a part of Canada.So if Quebec wants to leave? hurry up eh!
One of the few coherent things Chretien ever said was that if Canada was divisible, Quebec was divisible. How about a national border starting at the corner of Vermont, New Hampshire and Quebec, thence moving northwestward and splitting Montreal linguistically, then placing Hull (improperly called Gatineau) into the English side?

Does Quebec enjoy the idea of being split?

Last edited by jbgusa; 01-16-2015 at 10:41 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2015, 11:53 PM
 
Location: Toronto
13,666 posts, read 13,972,896 times
Reputation: 4537
This never is a pleasant discussion and it always evokes strong elements of passion and understandably so... I think when all is said and done, we can either engage in a real, sincere and genuine dialogue with the goal of making this country work better with its current boundaries or even altered into amicable fragments, maintain the status quo and just chug along where we will have a sort of divide that never will be strong enough to either bring us closer together or tear us apart, or finally where we do eventually become so bitter and frustrated yet concomitantly maintain a steadfast pride in something smaller than what I think we really are that we do indeed break this nation apart in anger. In my mind, this is more than just a matter for Quebecers to decide how to engage, it is something that we all need to become a part of and if that isn't rooted in sincerity than i'm afraid it will always be one that is rooted in pain and anger that even separation won't remedy.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Canada

All times are GMT -6.

¬© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top