NationStates Jolt Archive

Will it or won't it? This may be viewed with a bit of suspicion, but I believe that with the currently dysfunctional state of Canadian politics, the issue of sectionalism, both in Quebec and the Western provinces, is coming to a head, and separtist movements are gaining strenght after years of decline.

I personally think it is inevitable within ten years. There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession. Then, other provinces may follow.

So what do you think?

Will it or won't it? This may be viewed with a bit of suspicion, but I believe that with the currently dysfunctional state of Canadian politics, the issue of sectionalism, both in Quebec and the Western provinces, is coming to a head, and separtist movements are gaining strenght after years of decline.

I personally think it is inevitable within ten years. There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession. Then, other provinces may follow.

So what do you think?
Out of curiosity, are you Canadian? Most Canadians have been living with various sections threatening to leave for years, and yet, it never seems to happen. I'm not worried.

Long live independent Nunavut!

I would love it if my native Quebecois seperated! But i dont think its gonna happen.

I would love it if my native Quebecois seperated! But i dont think its gonna happen.
Yeah, it's not often that a province gets to experience firsthand the sensation of being crushed economically.

Out of curiosity, are you Canadian? Most Canadians have been living with various sections threatening to leave for years, and yet, it never seems to happen. I'm not worried.
I am not, but I live near the border. I go there all the time, and for being a guy, Toronto has some really good shopping.

Will it or won't it? This may be viewed with a bit of suspicion, but I believe that with the currently dysfunctional state of Canadian politics, the issue of sectionalism, both in Quebec and the Western provinces, is coming to a head, and separtist movements are gaining strenght after years of decline.

I personally think it is inevitable within ten years.

I personally think you're out of your mind.

There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession.

Which will fail, as always. Quebec has been bitching and whining and threatening secession forever but the fact is that the people who really seriously want to secede rather than just want to threaten it to make the Federal government pay more attention to them is nowhere near a majority of the population, and with the requirement now in place for such a referrendum to present a clear and unamibiguous "Will Quebec secede, yes or no" question rather than that obfuscating nonsense they pulled in the last referendum where a significant percentage of the people voting yes didn't even know that they were voting to secede they're simply not going to get the votes required.

Then, other provinces may follow.

Not a chance in hell.

How bout Canada becomes a parking lot? Then in the middle we could put a big ass amusment park. Beyond that, Canada has no real use

How bout Canada becomes a parking lot? Then in the middle we could put a big ass amusment park. Beyond that, Canada has no real use
You're American, right? How do you like our oil, wood, and water?

How bout Canada becomes a parking lot? Then in the middle we could put a big ass amusment park. Beyond that, Canada has no real use

And we could make part of it a Camp Ground, too.

Long live independent Nunavut!
lol :)

Camp ground? Hell why not!

Yeah, it's not often that a province gets to experience firsthand the sensation of being crushed economically.
i agree completly . . .I dont think could actually support itself economically does ne1 know if this is true?
(sry dp)

Why not a chance in hell...if you knew something about Canadian politics you would know that the province most likely to secede as of right now in December 2005, is not Quebec it's British Columbia. It is a rich province that feels very neglected by the federal governement.

And Quebec separtists suck...they don't even understand the ramifications of such a separation...they think Quebec will be a utopia but without the Northern indian parts threatening to rejoin Canada if it ever comes to that...Quebec loses all of its forestry and hydroelectrical power supply..there go your riches!!!

Oh yeah and the worst of all, they don't like being called separatists, they hate it in fact, they would like to be called patriots or sovereignists....ha ha ha damn separtists!

I personally think you're out of your mind.

I see you hate me.

I think it would be cool if Canada split up, it would proabably take some sort of political or economic catastrophe, but it would be neat to have some real nations up there instead of a giant collection of various regions and peoples.

Why not a chance in hell...if you knew something about Canadian politics you would know that the province most likely to secede as of right now in December 2005, is not Quebec it's British Columbia. It is a rich province that feels very neglected by the federal governement.

And Quebec separtists suck...they don't even understand the ramifications of such a separation...they think Quebec will be a utopia but without the Northern indian parts threatening to rejoin Canada if it ever comes to that...Quebec loses all of its forestry and hydroelectrical power supply..there go your riches!!!

Oh yeah and the worst of all, they don't like being called separatists, they hate it in fact, they would like to be called patriots or sovereignists....ha ha ha damn separtists!
ty very much for confirming that . . .has ne1 told the separitists that????
if so y do they still wanna separate?

The issue in and around Quebec is everconstant. It reaches peaks and valleys but is never pushed passed a certain threshold. Recent polls in Quebec state that 49.5 percent agree with the Sovereignty Association that was proposed. If these polls are accurate, then there is a major problem in Quebec.

Nearly half of Canadians in Quebec are content they want to see their province removed from Canada. Here's the catch: if an election would be held today, the Liberal government wouldn't lose seats in Quebec. They wouldn't even remain the same. Polls say that the Liberals would actually GAIN five seats in Quebec. Ironic, huh?

In order for a referendum, a strong provincial government is needed within Quebec. Apparently, Quebec is still unsure about The Bloc on a the federal medium. If this pattern proves the same over a provincial level, the Bloc will not have much chance.

Under these circumstances, a referendum would be nearly impossible, and thus Quebec seperating would be just as difficult.

The issue in and around Quebec is everconstant. It reaches peaks and valleys but is never pushed passed a certain threshold. Recent polls in Quebec state that 49.5 percent agree with the Sovereignty Association that was proposed. If these polls are accurate, then there is a major problem in Quebec.

Nearly half of Canadians in Quebec are content they want to see their province removed from Canada. Here's the catch: if an election would be held today, the Liberal government wouldn't lose seats in Quebec. They wouldn't even remain the same. Polls say that the Liberals would actually GAIN five seats in Quebec. Ironic, huh?

In order for a referendum, a strong provincial government is needed within Quebec. Apparently, Quebec is still unsure about The Bloc on a the federal medium. If this pattern proves the same over a provincial level, the Bloc will not have much chance.

Under these circumstances, a referendum would be nearly impossible, and thus Quebec seperating would be just as difficult.
Conventional wisdom says that the polls are full of hot air. It's the old problem of everyone says that they're for separation in theory, but when it comes down to actually doing it no one really wants to bother.

http://www.economist.com/printedition/
Read the articles in the survey of Canada. An interesting viewpoint.

I think it would be cool if Canada split up, it would proabably take some sort of political or economic catastrophe, but it would be neat to have some real nations up there instead of a giant collection of various regions and peoples.
Y is a giant collection of religions and peoples bad? i always thought that our racial and religious tolerance was one of the ways in which canada is infenitally better than many other countries

Conventional wisdom says that the polls are full of hot air. It's the old problem of everyone says that they're for separation in theory, but when it comes down to actually doing it no one really wants to bother.

That too, according to polls before the first two referendums, the outcome should have been 'yes.'

Conventional wisdom says that the polls are full of hot air. It's the old problem of everyone says that they're for separation in theory, but when it comes down to actually doing it no one really wants to bother.
I'm not too sure myself. No poll with your question has been conducted, and until then, I'm left assuming that they do want their own state. After all, during the last referendum, independence was killed by only about 30,000 votes.

The issue in and around Quebec is everconstant. It reaches peaks and valleys but is never pushed passed a certain threshold. Recent polls in Quebec state that 49.5 percent agree with the Sovereignty Association that was proposed. If these polls are accurate, then there is a major problem in Quebec.

Nearly half of Canadians in Quebec are content they want to see their province removed from Canada. Here's the catch: if an election would be held today, the Liberal government wouldn't lose seats in Quebec. They wouldn't even remain the same. Polls say that the Liberals would actually GAIN five seats in Quebec. Ironic, huh?

That is, considering that the Liberal government isn't real popular.

How bout Canada becomes a parking lot? Then in the middle we could put a big ass amusment park. Beyond that, Canada has no real use
Well, it's times like this you wish you could punch somebody through the screen isn't it?

Ignore list time. :)

That is, considering that the Liberal government isn't real popular.
now that i agree with . . .though im personally infavour of the NDP and totally against the conservatives

It's seperation within Confederation. Quebec doesn't have much more to gain, it gets more and more attention trying to make unique on the world stage. If Quebec gets seperation it will suffer economic disaster and it will be forced to become english, there is no way else francophones could survive with government support.

With Canada's sparse population in a huge land mass seperation is not feasible.

Alberta doesn't want seperation all it wants is a Conservative government that will help its already low taxes become lower and its economy boom even more.

B.C. is like Newfoundland suffers because of geography. The mountains are a mental as well as a physical barrier.

Well, it's times like this you wish you could punch somebody through the screen isn't it?

Ignore list time. :)
It gave me a random thought, actually. The Edmonton Mall has the world's largest parking lot, and it surrounds a giant amusement park. If the mall undergoes an expansion, maybe Canada would be a parking lot.
BTW, what province are you from?

I'm not too sure myself. No poll with your question has been conducted, and until then, I'm left assuming that they do want their own state. After all, during the last referendum, independence was killed by only about 30,000 votes.
I thought that actual separation in Quebec would take more than a 51-49 split in the votes. I heard it had to be something like 70-30 or something. It is a rather big change and all, I'm going to assume it's something they'd want to be sure of.

Besides, if Quebec ends up actually leaving, most of the province will end up staying, between natives up north who don't want to leave and others who want to stay part of Canada... hell, I can't imagine the anglophone population of Quebec is too supportive of this whole thing.

It gave me a random thought, actually. The Edmonton Mall has the world's largest parking lot, and it surrounds a giant amusement park. If the mall undergoes an expansion, maybe Canada would be a parking lot.
BTW, what province are you from?
Ontario. I'm not sure if I'll be staying though. After I finish my undergraduate I might take off out west.

I thought that actual separation in Quebec would take more than a 51-49 split in the votes. I heard it had to be something like 70-30 or something. It is a rather big change and all, I'm going to assume it's something they'd want to be sure of.
In 2000, when Quebec separatist sentiment hit a low, parliament passed the Clarity Act allowing for separation only if the referendum had a "clear majority". They left what that meant undefined.
Besides, if Quebec ends up actually leaving, most of the province will end up staying, between natives up north who don't want to leave and others who want to stay part of Canada... hell, I can't imagine the anglophone population of Quebec is too supportive of this whole thing.
The Western half has some sectionalist tensions that could feed a separatist movement there.

Ontario. I'm not sure if I'll be staying though. After I finish my undergraduate I might take off out west.
Thought you might be. I'm not trying to be rude, but Ontario does have the most to gain from federation.

http://www.economist.com/printedition/
Read the articles in the survey of Canada. An interesting viewpoint.
Which article am I supposed to look at? There are a number on the page (the first one didn't work either, you need a subscription)

Thought you might be. I'm not trying to be rude, but Ontario does have the most to gain from federation.
What do the other provinces have to gain from separation?
Furthermore, what does Ontario gain by staying? Ontario and Alberta are the only provinces putting more money into the federal government than they're getting back, all the other provinces get more from the feds than they put in.

Besides, if Quebec ends up actually leaving, most of the province will end up staying, between natives up north who don't want to leave and others who want to stay part of Canada... hell, I can't imagine the anglophone population of Quebec is too supportive of this whole thing.

Thing is, if Quebec leaves, it will not possess its north.

When they signed as a part of Canada, the Candian government GIFTED them the north that they own, since they had just bought it from the Hudson's Bay Company. If Quebec leaves, Canada has the right to take back its land that belongs to Canada and was only given to Quebec under the condition they remain within Canada.

And with all those precious resources up there, who'd like to give them away?(besides Mulroney, of course)

What do the other provinces have to gain from separation?
Furthermore, what does Ontario gain by staying? Ontario and Alberta are the only provinces putting more money into the federal government than they're getting back, all the other provinces get more from the feds than they put in.
which is why i dont undestand Quebecs apparent desire to sperate . . . ..

Why not a chance in hell...if you knew something about Canadian politics you would know that the province most likely to secede as of right now in December 2005, is not Quebec it's British Columbia. It is a rich province that feels very neglected by the federal governement.
I'm curious, what issues does British Columbia have? I've never been out there, but it seems to be a beautiful province, and I know that there are several schools out there that are considered excellent, hell, part of CERN's latest project was built out there, but I'm rather ignorant of what's going on out there... what could the federal government do to make BC happy?

Which article am I supposed to look at? There are a number on the page (the first one didn't work either, you need a subscription)
Let me see if I can find you a link to the printable version that doesn't require a subscription. A subscription to The Economist is well worth your money though.

Thing is, if Quebec leaves, it will not possess its north.

When they signed as a part of Canada, the Candian government GIFTED them the north that they own, since they had just bought it from the Hudson's Bay Company. If Quebec leaves, Canada has the right to take back its land that belongs to Canada and was only given to Quebec under the condition they remain within Canada.

And with all those precious resources up there, who'd like to give them away?(besides Mulroney, of course)
That's kinda funny. Isn't all Quebec's hydroelectric power coming from up there?

Let me see if I can find you a link to the printable version that doesn't require a subscription. A subscription to The Economist is well worth your money though.
If I weren't a university student I'd be inclined to agree. Food in my stomach is currently more important.

If I weren't a university student I'd be inclined to agree. Food in my stomach is currently more important.
There you go. (http://www.economist.com/surveys/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=5243159)

EDIT: I'm in university too. Still worth it.

I'm curious, what issues does British Columbia have? I've never been out there, but it seems to be a beautiful province, and I know that there are several schools out there that are considered excellent, hell, part of CERN's latest project was built out there, but I'm rather ignorant of what's going on out there... what could the federal government do to make BC happy?

People here in BC are fucking pissed about softwood lumber, it is a major industry in many areas and is vital for some communities. The fact that marijuana is still illegal is also a reason for some resentment. According to a newspaper (the Province I think) if marijuana was legal it would be the largest industry in BC. To ship goods via the CPR from BC costs more than it does for companies outside BC to ship goods into BC. Probably the main reason BC hates the feds so much is that even though BC is the third largest province (by population) the feds are quick to "suck up" to Quebec (ie we have to learn French in school, when Mandarin or Punjabi are better choices for most BC students.

People here in BC are fucking pissed about softwood lumber, it is a major industry in many areas and is vital for some communities. The fact that marijuana is still illegal is also a reason for some resentment. According to a newspaper (the Province I think) if marijuana was legal it would be the largest industry in BC. To ship goods via the CPR from BC costs more than it does for companies outside BC to ship goods into BC. Probably the main reason BC hates the feds so much is that even though BC is the third largest province (by population) the feds are quick to "suck up" to Quebec.
Ok, yeah, that softwood lumber thing is bullshit. I don't think that's really the our government's fault, there's only so much they can do and they have been pressing the issue with the american government, I thought there was a court decision a while back that sided on our side about that too. Essentially stating that what the american government is trying to do is illegal.
I didn't know that marijuana was actually that big of an issue out there, I thought that was sort of a joke, to be honest, but again, the federal government tried to decriminalize and then the american government flipped out, while I think it is stupid that our government is being so damn spineless about this too, we can't alientate the americans and it would be really bad if they did tighten up the border. Although I think we should diversity our imports and exports more and then tell them they can fuck themselves, but that's just me.
I don't understand why it should cost more money to ship something out of BC than to ship something in, that simply doesn't make sense.
And yeah, the feds need to stop brownosing Quebec. If Canada was a family and the federal government were the parents, I'd say they're doing a lousy job parenting by paying so much attention to the child acting out while ignoring the others.

edit: Oops, I didn't catch your edit. I think part of the deal with having to learn french is that it's one of the official languages. Hell, I'm from the GTA, believe me, there are a hell of a lot more speakers of punjabi and mandarin than there are french speakers...

There you go. (http://www.economist.com/surveys/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=5243159)

EDIT: I'm in university too. Still worth it.
Fair enough.

But then the thing about Ontario is that we're the province with the most expensive post secondary education. Stupid Harris. :P

Fair enough.

But then the thing about Ontario is that we're the province with the most expensive post secondary education. Stupid Harris. :P
U of M for the win. Ridiculously easy classes with crappy profs and a degree that's worth very little. That's why I'm going to Ontario for graduate studies.

U of M for the win. Ridiculously easy classes with crappy profs and a degree that's worth very little. That's why I'm going to Ontario for graduate studies.
U of M?

Graduate studies are a different thing though, they pay you to do them at that point. Plus since admission is based on your average, then having the easy classes might come in handy. ;) I go to McMaster, apparantly our physics department is one of the tougher ones. While doing an online search for some help with our GR assignment I discovered that the graduate students at MIT had easier questions on their assignments than we did as undergraduate students.

U of M?
University of Manitoba. You get a better education when tuition fees are higher.

Why not a chance in hell...if you knew something about Canadian politics you would know that the province most likely to secede as of right now in December 2005, is not Quebec it's British Columbia.

He says to the guy who lived most of his life in British Columbia... whose almost entire family still lives there... who is back there multiple times a year for visits and catching up with everyone... and who now calls bullshit.

It is a rich province that feels very neglected by the federal governement.

None of which translates into even a remote possibility of B.C. seceding anytime in the next century or two.

I see you hate me.

No I just think, as I said, that you're out of your mind to conclude the seperation of Canada is inevitable in the next 10 years.

U of M, nice party school (4th floor UC 03-05). I had to leave but I'd really like to go back sometime....

U of M, nice party school (4th floor UC 03-05). I had to leave but I'd really like to go back sometime....

Little too much bottle, eh?

You're telling me, improved alot second year, economics forced a detour in my post-secondary plans...

Will it or won't it? This may be viewed with a bit of suspicion, but I believe that with the currently dysfunctional state of Canadian politics, the issue of sectionalism, both in Quebec and the Western provinces, is coming to a head, and separtist movements are gaining strenght after years of decline.

I personally think it is inevitable within ten years. There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession. Then, other provinces may follow.

So what do you think?
I think you should tend to your "CyberSheep". Someone is trying to pull the wool over your eyes and we are not ready to except your yarn at this time. :D

University of Manitoba. You get a better education when tuition fees are higher.
Well, the thing is that all the other provinces fund post secondary institutions better. It used to be that students in Ontario could leave with relatively little debt but that changed fairly recently.

If George the III is followed by another Republican president and continues to maintains a Republican majority in the US Congress then annexation of Canada ( the oil & lumber rich portions anyway ) can't be far off. No need to bother with the messiness of dissolution.


I personally think it is inevitable within ten years. There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession. Then, other provinces may follow.

Safe at Third']If George the III is followed by another Republican president and continues to maintains a Republican majority in the US Congress then annexation of Canada ( the oil & lumber rich portions anyway ) can't be far off. No need to bother with the messiness of dissolution.
Trolling, trolling, trolling, keep those doggies trolling.....Rawhide.

Head 'em up and mov'em out cowboy. :rolleyes:

Quebec will separate first, if anyone, but even if they win the referendum, the feds have dozens of legal outs that could delay the process by decades. BC doesn't have the organization or the balls to separate. Alberta is the province that would benefit most from separation financially, and the provincial gov. might be able to pull off a referendum if they managed to out-advertise the feds, but right now the issue isn't really on the map for any serious Albertan party.

Safe at Third']If George the III is followed by another Republican president and continues to maintains a Republican majority in the US Congress then annexation of Canada ( the oil & lumber rich portions anyway ) can't be far off. No need to bother with the messiness of dissolution.

Did I miss one?


I thought there were only 2 (so far).

Will it or won't it? This may be viewed with a bit of suspicion, but I believe that with the currently dysfunctional state of Canadian politics, the issue of sectionalism, both in Quebec and the Western provinces, is coming to a head, and separtist movements are gaining strenght after years of decline.

I personally think it is inevitable within ten years. There is no way that the current political impasse in Ottawa will be resolved easily, leaving a weak and indecisive federal government. Meanwhile, the Liberal government of Quebec will be removed in favor of Parti Quebecois, which will surely hold a referendum on secession. Then, other provinces may follow.

So what do you think?
So, basically, I've juste read four pages of typical canadian bullshit. None of you are actually from Quebec and you're only approving each other's lies. Great. So now, let's get real.

I'll answer a few posts (others are just repetitions anyway), in my best english...

Post from Ragbralbur:
Yeah, it's not often that a province gets to experience firsthand the sensation of being crushed economically.
Any actual research to back your crisis thesis? Besides a few lies and a good lot of prejudices, do you have anything to support your assertion? I agree there would be a few years (between three and seven, or so) of adjustements, as it is always the case with new governments and new nations. Mostly positive adjustements, if anything. We have a national (as in Quebec's) debt of more or less 90 billions. Compared to our GDP, it is much less (%) than Canada's and pretty manageable, comparable to that of Sweden's and Norway if I recall right. Ranking among the best in the "industrial world".

To say that Quebec's economy would crumble means that yours, as well, would be in... um... deep shit? We export/import tons of goods with Canada and the USA (and a lot of countries but mainly those two). Speculating about our possible "economy crisis" is rather stupid: it is to no one's interest to see Quebec's economy on the downfall. There's a lot of researches about a post-independence economy and the crushing majority agree: it would be as good or better (if managed correctly, but that's another story. We have the same corrupt politicians here.).

Post from Reformentia:
Which will fail, as always. Quebec has been bitching and whining and threatening secession forever but the fact is that the people who really seriously want to secede rather than just want to threaten it to make the Federal government pay more attention to them is nowhere near a majority of the populationrather than that obfuscating nonsense they pulled in the last referendum where a significant percentage of the people voting yes didn't even know that they were voting to secede they're simply not going to get the votes required.[/quote]
Thank you, Prophet. Quebec has been threatening secession for thirty years, more or less. Your "forever" seems a bit out of touch.

The latest polls here, in Quebec, say the "Independence" would get an average of 52% of the votes. Considering the precedents (1980 and 1995, the two previous referendum), one has to conclude that support for Independence has never been so strong. Moreover, the "no" option tend to be on the defensive during referendums, meaning they lost some of their advance during the campaigns. Starting a referendum with 52% of yes has never happened.

and with the requirement now in place for such a referrendum to present a clear and unamibiguous "Will Quebec secede, yes or no" question
The requirement seems to be a pretty authoritative decree from a governing power to an oppressed nation. A pretty useless too, since most people want a direct question, here, too.

rather than that obfuscating nonsense they pulled in the last referendum where a significant percentage of the people voting yes didn't even know that they were voting to secede they're simply not going to get the votes required.
Insulting, to say the least. Keep on spewing more of that paternalist bullshit. "Oh, the poor quebecer couldn't understand the question, that's why so many voted yes". How about "fuck off"? Just keep thinking we're a bunch of idiotic fools, it just gives the Independence movement more and more support, every day. (And c'mon, a 90 day-long campaign with signs and articles everywhere about it, wouldn't you think most people knew what the fuck was the question about? If anything, we know for a fact that a good number of "no" voters were actually old people who voted "as usual", for their good old Canada, knowing nothing about politics and so on)


Post from Ertalia:
And Quebec separtists suck...they don't even understand the ramifications of such a separation...they think Quebec will be a utopia but without the Northern indian parts threatening to rejoin Canada if it ever comes to that...Quebec loses all of its forestry and hydroelectrical power supply..there go your riches!!!
Thank you for the insult, both to myself and our collective intelligence. Well, sad enough for you (and another guy who posted approximatively the same thing later), a majority of "quebecers" live in the Northern parts of Quebec, not indians. Quebec's territory is it's own and that is recognized by about every treaty that was made, most notably by the NATO and the U.N. As a sovereign nation (it is, by its very definition, a nation), it would be entitled to claim these lands as its own and nobody with a sane mind would actually challenge that. Moreover, besides the Manic projects in the Northern parts of our territory, we have a lot of hydroelectrical projects in different parts of Quebec and most of our forestry industries aren't there, as well, because of a lack of easy transportation. I also would like to point to you the fact that Quebec isn't only all "hydroelectricity" and "forests", thanks. (And that all our hydroelectricity is under the national control of Hydro-Québec which is directly administrated by the govt of Quebec.)

Oh yeah and the worst of all, they don't like being called separatists, they hate it in fact, they would like to be called patriots or sovereignists....ha ha ha damn separtists!
Ugh? Actually, people rarely use "separatists" just because it is pretty out-of-date, really "80's". A lot like "You can talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?". Cmon already. Synonyms, it means nothing. Plus, "separatists" had a very pejorative meaning attached to it, here, thanks to the pro-Canada bullshit-propaganda. Nothing but lies, that became myths. Their postulates have since been attacked and defeated and one can see the results: support for the Independence has never been so strong.


Post from Mennland:
The issue in and around Quebec is everconstant. It reaches peaks and valleys but is never pushed passed a certain threshold. Recent polls in Quebec state that 49.5 percent agree with the Sovereignty Association that was proposed. If these polls are accurate, then there is a major problem in Quebec.
Actually, most recent polls showed between 52 and 56% of "yes" if the question would be a direct one (To sum it: Quebec a nation: yes or no?). No Sovereignity Association but I think it is logical. One has always been a winner to collaborate with its closest neighbors.

I don't understand your conclusion thought? There is a major problem in Quebec? Would you actually push for another completly illegal campaign of promotion where hundread of millions would be spent just to get canadian flags and ads everywhere in Quebec, much like in 1995 and since?

Nearly half of Canadians in Quebec are content they want to see their province removed from Canada. Here's the catch: if an election would be held today, the Liberal government wouldn't lose seats in Quebec. They wouldn't even remain the same. Polls say that the Liberals would actually GAIN five seats in Quebec. Ironic, huh?
Which level of governement? For the federal, it will pretty much stay like it is, overall. It is hard for the Bloc Quebecois to gain more seats than they actually have, since they stand virtually no chance to win a dozen of very-english seats (Westmount, Pierrefonds and so on). If you're talking about the provincial liberal govt, could you please give me your references? ALL the polls I've watched in the past years place the Parti Quebecois comfortably in advance, literally crushing the Liberal party (a 43 to 23 margin, in most polls, with the ADQ getting most of the rest). Quebec's PM, Jean Charest, has a popularity level of 17 to 21% and that has been stable since two good years (he's been in for approximatively a bit more than two years - April 14 2003).


Post from Lotus Puppy:
I'm not too sure myself. No poll with your question has been conducted, and until then, I'm left assuming that they do want their own state. After all, during the last referendum, independence was killed by only about 30,000 votes.
Thank you for not making assumptions and for not spewing generalities unlike others.

Yes, the Independence side lost by 30,000 votes, mostly due to the fact that the "no" side benefited enormously from canadian donors and campaigns, including the famous "Sponsorship scandal" (Scandale des commandites, where I come from). That and the fact a good lot of new immigrants were made eligible to cast their votes by a canadian government that hasted procedures so they could be accepted as canadians and quickly vote "no", all too happy to vote for "their new country", knowing nothing about the history of our nation, Quebec.


Post from Planners:
It's seperation within Confederation. Quebec doesn't have much more to gain, it gets more and more attention trying to make unique on the world stage. If Quebec gets seperation it will suffer economic disaster and it will be forced to become english, there is no way else francophones could survive with government support.
Quebec is an unique nation. You are free to read by yourself the definition of nation detailled in the U.N official charter and annexes. Aside from the pseudo-economic disaster (a myth I attacked earlier), I just can't understand the "it will become english". Oh, cmon now?! Like the federal gov't was protecting us! It is, as of yet, our biggest enemy and always has been. We have our own laws to counter such problems, notably the 101 law. Moreover, we have "survived" for more than 245 years, enduring the occupiers.


Post from Dakini:
I thought that actual separation in Quebec would take more than a 51-49 split in the votes. I heard it had to be something like 70-30 or something. It is a rather big change and all, I'm going to assume it's something they'd want to be sure of.
Ah, O.K, a 50+1 SURE ISN'T a majority?! Keep your 70-30 for yourself, comrade. I think that when the majority decides something, it is rather undemocratic to say that decision doesn't count, that it's not "valid". By the way, even Canada's Supreme Court said we were right on that, validating the 50+1 logic.

Besides, if Quebec ends up actually leaving, most of the province will end up staying, between natives up north who don't want to leave and others who want to stay part of Canada... hell, I can't imagine the anglophone population of Quebec is too supportive of this whole thing.
Ugh? If Quebec ends up "actually leaving", it will be leaving, simple as that. Some "english-speaking residents" might end up going for Ontario, but I very much doubt a massive exodus would happen. The three major parties in Quebec agreed to vote an unanimous motion that stated Quebec was a nation and unique and so on. That includes Quebec's Liberal party, who usually gets most english votes. By the way, we have our own treaties with "natives" living on Quebec's soil.


Post from Lotus Puppy:
In 2000, when Quebec separatist sentiment hit a low, parliament passed the Clarity Act allowing for separation only if the referendum had a "clear majority". They left what that meant undefined.
A "clear majority" means 50+1. Every sane person knows that. That category excludes Stephane Dion (the man behind this treatous and illegal (by international laws, it sure is) Act).

The Western half has some sectionalist tensions that could feed a separatist movement there.
That's a given. Plus, the reactions to an independent Quebec could vary, maybe giving fuel to pro-independence movements in B.C and Alberta and elsewhere.


Post from Mennland:
If Quebec leaves, Canada has the right to take back its land that belongs to Canada and was only given to Quebec under the condition they remain within Canada.
Yes and it could also claim Alaska while you're at it. Don't be afraid, champion canadian imperialism today!


Post from [NS::]Safe at Third:
If George the III is followed by another Republican president and continues to maintains a Republican majority in the US Congress then annexation of Canada ( the oil & lumber rich portions anyway ) can't be far off. No need to bother with the messiness of dissolution.
Anyway, most canadians wouldn't see any difference besides the fact their beautiful red and white flag would be replaced by a ... red and white and blue flag. Actually, given the relatively liberal side of canadian politics compared to american ones, I don't think it is in King George's best interests to see 3-4 new states emerge from Canada. They would tend to vote democratic. I mean, only a few idiotic conservatives (including Harper and Stockwell Nobody) actually believe in restricting abortion here.

(Well, of course, they would vote democratic until they get their election process gets rigged by those F-A-B-U-L-O-U-S Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia machines. God bless them! They gave "America" another four years of Büsh! And more could be added if he goes on and declares himself Il Duce of the USA. He's only a name away, anyway.)

I'm not from Quebec, but I have lived here a couple years at university, and I've obviously met a fair amount of native Quebecois of all shapes and sizes (one thing that still strikes me is just how wonderfully diverse Montreal is). It seems to me that a larger percentage of students from outside Montreal tend to be for secession than those from the city itself, which fits the statistics, unless I'm mistaken. I'm not qualified to say whether or not Quebec would make it on its own, but I know many Montrealers who would leave, flat out, if that happened, and they aren't all English. While I do sympathise with Quebec's desire to separate because of various cultural differences between it and the rest of Canada, I can't see where the tangible benefits would be. Enlighten me if I'm wrong, but I'm not getting how this makes economic sense for Quebec. Other provinces stand to benefit far more, economically speaking, from secession.

I wouldn't be surprised. Canada is a very seperatist nation. I mean, separation of NW Territories into Nunavut. Separation of the NHL into the East and West conferences. Separation from the Red Cross to form the Red Maple Leaf.

I see you hate me.http://teamfreaktattoo.homestead.com/files/SPONSORS/hehateme.jpg
:D

Thank you, Prophet. Quebec has been threatening secession for thirty years, more or less. Your "forever" seems a bit out of touch.

Hyperbole, meet Tderjeckistan. Tderjeckistan, allow me to introduce you to my friend Hyperbole.

The latest polls here, in Quebec, say the "Independence" would get an average of 52% of the votes.

It's a lot easier to claim you're in favor of seperation in a poll that has no consequences whatsoever than in a referendum that could actually result in you having to DEAL with the reality of actual seperation.

The requirement seems to be a pretty authoritative decree from a governing power to an oppressed nation.

Bullshit. It's a requirement that if you're going to have an election that results in the province leaving the country if the yes side wins you have to state that clearly so people all know what they're voting on. Oh, the oppression! Forcing the poor government of Quebec not to deliberately mislead the voters! The Feds are pure evil!

Insulting, to say the least. Keep on spewing more of that paternalist bullshit. "Oh, the poor quebecer couldn't understand the question, that's why so many voted yes".

Listen genius, they surveyed the voters coming out of the referendum in exit polls. A significant percentage of yes voters were under the impression that a yes vote would NOT result in secession. That is just a fact. If you don’t want to deal with it, too bad. And don’t think the separatists didn’t know damn well what they were doing when they crafted that absurd question in the first place.

And it still holds today. The Globe and Mail JUST did a poll in Quebec about a month and a half ago. When presented with the same question as in the 1995 referendum the results were 49% Yes, 48% No, and 5% Undecided. When the same damn people were asked if they would vote to secede from Canada it was 53% No, 43% Yes. That’s a hell of a significant percentage who STILL don’t think that ridiculous 1995 question actually means secession if it’s a Yes vote. When faced with a direct “Do you want Quebec to secede, Yes or no?” question all of a sudden support swings a full 11 percentage points against the separatists.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051022.wxpoll1022/BNStory/National/

How about "fuck off"? Just keep thinking we're a bunch of idiotic fools, it just gives the Independence movement more and more support, every day. (And c'mon, a 90 day-long campaign with signs and articles everywhere about it, wouldn't you think most people knew what the fuck was the question about?

Not with the Yes side doing everything they could to make sure they were misled. As I just demonstrated they still haven't all figured it out ten years later.

If they want to build a new nation let them do so. I'm all for it.

Ok, yeah, that softwood lumber thing is bullshit. I don't think that's really the our government's fault, there's only so much they can do and they have been pressing the issue with the american government, I thought there was a court decision a while back that sided on our side about that too. Essentially stating that what the american government is trying to do is illegal.
The softwood lumber issue has died down somewhat, after the govt put tariffs on some US sea food. Some are upset about how long it took them to do that.
I didn't know that marijuana was actually that big of an issue out there, I thought that was sort of a joke, to be honest, but again, the federal government tried to decriminalize and then the american government flipped out, while I think it is stupid that our government is being so damn spineless about this too, we can't alientate the americans and it would be really bad if they did tighten up the border. Although I think we should diversity our imports and exports more and then tell them they can fuck themselves, but that's just me.
To some people it is a joke, but many see it as a serious issue. Your opinion does seem to be what the majority of BCers think.
I don't understand why it should cost more money to ship something out of BC than to ship something in, that simply doesn't make sense.
They say it is easier to navigate the mountains into BC than it is coming out of BC.
edit: Oops, I didn't catch your edit. I think part of the deal with having to learn french is that it's one of the official languages. Hell, I'm from the GTA, believe me, there are a hell of a lot more speakers of punjabi and mandarin than there are french speakers...
I'm from the GVRD. Downtown, the number of people who speak Mandarin natively is huge; many signs are printed in English and Mandarin. If govt estimates are correct, Asian people will be the majority in BC in the next ten years. That would be great if true, but it would be nice if I could be able to talk to them.
There was also a problem with American fishermen fishing in Canadian waters. The Fed's allowed it to happen for a few years. Now the only problem fishermen face is the fact that the can't fish every year because our fishing regulations do not apply to the natives so they just leave a net accross the river and catch all the fish. Not all tribes do it (I think it is just one or two) but they are so effictive at catching fish like that it is ruining it for everyone else.

Is Canada About to Separate?

No, of course not, but people have been having fun discussing it for about the last 40-45 years or so..;)

http://www.stephaniesworld.com/Lib-can1.gif

Oh dear sweet Canada, as long as you kep making Degrassi does it really matter?

I was going to say something on a vaguely comical note, but instead I'm going to go rather official here...

Cool it.

You may not agree, but please be civil while doing so.

Quebec was threatening separation in the 1970's too. Nothing happened, mainly for ecomomic reasons. The US is badly divided right now, too. It's the nature of the times we're in. This too shall pass.

You're American, right? How do you like our oil, wood, and water?
Hey We gave you Pamela Anderson too!;)

I don't think canada will fall apart, its a bit like britain, some will want to split away but the majority won't.

for example wales

the bits that could stand on their own two feet (cardiff and swansea probably) don't want to.

I think the country most likerly to fall apart is probably the USA, I mean technically your a federated union of countries anyway.

its only one small step

I don't think canada will fall apart, its a bit like britain, some will want to split away but the majority won't.

for example wales

the bits that could stand on their own two feet (cardiff and swansea probably) don't want to.

I think the country most likerly to fall apart is probably the USA, I mean technically your a federated union of countries anyway.

its only one small stepIt would make sense, in many cases - Utah, for example, and Vermont, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Texas, and California would make sense as independent nations for one reason or another - but the problem is this little thing of precedent.

The whole "Grant vs the Confederate States" precedent. I know that wasn't a court case, but it makes it... rather difficult to get the nerve to secede.

And the whole "if we leave, we are no longer part of the world's biggest military superpower!" deal. Some people are hung up on being part of a "great" thing.

it would be a shame if canada seperated :(

How bout Canada becomes a parking lot? Then in the middle we could put a big ass amusment park. Beyond that, Canada has no real use
Silly Americans. That makes no sense. And if amusement parks are only open during the summer, it makes no sense to permanently place them somewhere.

Post from Ragbralbur:

Any actual research to back your crisis thesis? Besides a few lies and a good lot of prejudices, do you have anything to support your assertion? I agree there would be a few years (between three and seven, or so) of adjustements, as it is always the case with new governments and new nations. Mostly positive adjustements, if anything. We have a national (as in Quebec's) debt of more or less 90 billions. Compared to our GDP, it is much less (%) than Canada's and pretty manageable, comparable to that of Sweden's and Norway if I recall right. Ranking among the best in the "industrial world".

To say that Quebec's economy would crumble means that yours, as well, would be in... um... deep shit? We export/import tons of goods with Canada and the USA (and a lot of countries but mainly those two). Speculating about our possible "economy crisis" is rather stupid: it is to no one's interest to see Quebec's economy on the downfall. There's a lot of researches about a post-independence economy and the crushing majority agree: it would be as good or better (if managed correctly, but that's another story. We have the same corrupt politicians here.).
Yes, actually, I have economic theory backing my position. Trade liberalization causes economies to grow more quickly. The removal of Quebec from Canada would cause an end to what has been one of the most fluid markets between two "nations", as you put it. Canada is not going to like you because you just screwed us over. More importantly though, the US isn't going to like you because you're French. Frankly, I don't care one way or the other, but I seem to recall that the Americans dislike the French to a rather extreme degree. If you want to separate, fine, but the political ramifications are that you find the United States and Canada drawn closer together and find yourself shunted off to the side with less access to your two biggest trading partners. Economically, you lose.

it would be a shame if canada seperated :(
Meh. What practical difference would it make to anyone outside of Canada and Quebec?

Considering how Canadians do not really have the same intent on national politics as other nation's citizenry, there really isn't a feasible technique or purpose for the issue to go one way or another.

Canadians really just want the whole situation sorted out. The weak and worthless government isn't necessarily going to be dismissed, but it is very likely that it'll be replaced (yet again for a meager attempt at reform). Hopefully, the separatists can get enough attention from the international community so publicized compliants lead to suggestions that the separatists actually take drastic measures.

Hopefully the Parti Québécois will manage to have a successful leader that can do what Lévesque, Parizeau, and Bouchard have failed upon. Quebec is not isolated from the rest of N. America, but it does have a different culture and different set of politcal preferences from the rest of its nation.

As for the west, just look at this:
http://www.westcan.org/westcan/101.htm (101 reasons for Independence)

~~Snip~~
Okay, I read all of your post and disagree with you on most of what you have stated, but since you are touting Quebec separation, I would like you to honestly answer 3 questions.

1. What are the top 5 reasons for Quebecers wanting to separate?

2. What do you see as the top 5 gains for a separate Quebec?

3. What do you see as the top 5 loses for a separate Quebec?

It will be interesting to see your answer.

University of Manitoba. You get a better education when tuition fees are higher.
Interesting perspective, especially given that I know someone who left BC to do his PhD at U of M. And here you are, putting it down.

Okay, I read all of your post and disagree with you on most of what you have stated, but since you are touting Quebec separation, I would like you to honestly answer 3 questions.

1. What are the top 5 reasons for Quebecers wanting to separate?

2. What do you see as the top 5 gains for a separate Quebec?

3. What do you see as the top 5 loses for a separate Quebec?

It will be interesting to see your answer.

Hey hey, answer from a native Quebecer :P

1. Top 5 reasons :D :
-Economical reasons (we loose billions every year)

-Escaping the federation of Canada (The government of Canada keeps appropriating the province's departments, except in Quebec, where we waste billions of dollars in the name of a corrupt government)

-Progress (Quebec has made many social advances in Canada, and has been laughed at at first. Let's just mention the Daycare for young children and the Health Insurance System, which are provincial roles that have been nationalized)

-Cultural identity (Quebec is not Canada. But we know we are not having a birth rate high enough to keep the nation alive. That's okay, because it's temporary, a result of the stopping of religious influence. It's going to settle down in the next years, as long as the economy goes better)

-Quebecers and English Canadians can't live in the same nation (The racism in Canada is soooo high against Quebecers. We talk about the "white niggers of America". So many prejudice I've seen for the past ten years from English Canadians. Two distinct nations cannot live in harmony in the same country. There's only two options: separation or assimilation. I don't think anyone wants to be assimilated.)

2. Reasons against
-Keep our rocky mountains! (that's the stupid argument we received in the 1995 referendum. That was sooooo dumb! :D)

-Red Tape (There's alot of job to do in a new Quebec)

-Economical reasons (Yes! Some economists think that a sovereign Quebec might have a problem with the industry. I think that's possible, but not worth as much as the expenses we lose because of the Canadian government. We have a particular industries in Quebec, that people can't find elsewhere in the United States. Electricity, Aluminium, etc. An intelligent government can be able to make a sovereign Quebec capable of having a strong economy.)

-English Canadians love us! (Yeah, that's what some people came to tell us at the last referendum. Thing is, they were paid by the Canadian government to do so ;). A small branch of the sponsorships scandal. Thing is, when we go to Canada, we're just being told: Go back to Quebec! Many intelligent people called the Quebecers nazists and anti-semitists. Thing is, jewish schools in Montreal are among the best in Quebec. And we don't want to genocide English Canadians in Quebec, we want our independance for more than just cultural reasons. It's not even the most important argument.)

-Huh?! There's another reason? Well, some English Canadians might want to leave the province.

What has to take place, governmentally, before Quebec can separate?

Is a Yes vote in a referendum sufficient?

Why would Parliament ever want to allow succession?


Thanks,

I honestly can not think of any reasons your average Pierre would want to separate, so I won't comment there.

Five Pros:

1) They can finally be a nation-state instead of pretending to be one.

2) Don't have to worry about accomodating Ottawa.

3) Can discriminate against lingual minorities all they want without interferance.

4) Can make their own national hockey team (apparantly this is a big issue)

5) So they can go more socialist than Canada allows.

Five Cons:

1) Quebec is not one of the Canadian "have" provinces, they leave and they will lose the money they recieve from Ottawa in transfer payments.

2) They will lose alot of territory, Canada is divisable so is Quebec.

3) They will lose membership in a few agreements from which they benefit, they would have to reapply for things such as NAFTA.

4) Would require alot of capital to create national institutions such as a proper military, foreign service, and other things that Ottawa currently pays for.

5) Will suffer an economic downturn for sure, political instability tends to do that.

Hey hey, answer from a native Quebecer :P

1. Top 5 reasons :D :
-Economical reasons (we loose billions every year)



Technically not true. We receive payments from the perequation. While we may stand to gain by managing our economy ourselves, and by redirecting the taxes paid at Ottawa to Quebec and spending them from there, we receive *slightly* more federal funds than we pay.

So, while we would in reality receive a little less money than we do now, we could save billions by, say, not paying billions for a gun registry, restricting military spending, saving the money uselessly spent on the senate, Queen and governor general, etc.


-Quebecers and English Canadians can't live in the same nation (The racism in Canada is soooo high against Quebecers. We talk about the "white niggers of America". So many prejudice I've seen for the past ten years from English Canadians. Two distinct nations cannot live in harmony in the same country. There's only two options: separation or assimilation. I don't think anyone wants to be assimilated.)

Again, not true. There's education, and a philosophy of "live and let live".

As a gay man, I face prejudice in my daily life. That doesn't mean I either have to move off to some gay la-la-land lost in the mountains far from any straight influence, nor that I have to start banging chicks just to blend in. I only have to teach others to learn to respect me and my differences.

We can do the same things as french-canadians.


I agree with you about the so-called "reasons against" stand. I don't buy any of those bullshit reasons not to separate: my personnal motivation is that in this age of globalisation, it stands to reason our best bet is to regroup, not divide. Independance, while all well and good in theory as far as our cultural differences stand, would open to door for all those corporate giants just waiting to feed off our corpse(figuratively speaking).

That, and I like my rockies mountains:rolleyes:

Five Cons:

1) Quebec is not one of the Canadian "have" provinces, they leave and they will lose the money they recieve from Ottawa in transfer payments.


Perhaps, but we're hardly a "have not" province, as some english canadians so arrogantly put it. Granted, we're not as heavily industrialized as Ontario, and we're not sitting in a pool of oil, but countries of similar population have been doing good in the scandinavian region. Some would argue we would be better off slightly less well-off financially, but at least being able to decide things for ourselves. I'm neither in agreement nor in disagreement over this, though.


2) They will lose alot of territory, Canada is divisable so is Quebec.

That, at least, is part of a fear-mongering campaign by the federalist camp in order to scare people off sovereignty. As far as I know, that territory issue could come up, but would have to be ultimately settled by the UN should it arise. And allow me to doubt we would be depossed of electrical centrals WE paid hundreds of billions over the last 20 years.


4) Would require alot of capital to create national institutions such as a proper military, foreign service, and other things that Ottawa currently pays for.

5) Will suffer an economic downturn for sure, political instability tends to do that.
See my previous post regarding these. While I do not think we would suffer much economic turmoil, a little of it is to be expected in the event that we did separate.

Economic turndowns caused by political instability are often side-effects of a fear of a war: civil or otherwise.

But economic interests know Quebec isn't a third world country, and separation would certainly not mean war: neither Canada nor Quebec would want to waste money on that. And both would have much credibility to lose on the internation scene.

That, and I like my rockies mountains:rolleyes:As a BCer, I agree - the Rockies are most excellent.

And I'd hate to see Quebec go, even though I've never been east of Navan, Ontario. But I really want to do a cross-Canada tour someday.

I have been across the country of Canada three times and I only had my twentieth birthday yesterday. I am also a French-Canadian! However, I think the separatist cause is absolutely stupid and being apart of the Canadian army I would be prepared to fight the separatists if that is what is needed to if civil-war starts, even if I am against my cousins, my aunts, my uncles, and my grandparents who all live in Quebec.

Now this is the Quebec family against Quebec family Martin was talking about. However, I am going to vote NDP!

Perhaps, but we're hardly a "have not" province, as some english canadians so arrogantly put it. Granted, we're not as heavily industrialized as Ontario, and we're not sitting in a pool of oil, but countries of similar population have been doing good in the scandinavian region. Some would argue we would be better off slightly less well-off financially, but at least being able to decide things for ourselves. I'm neither in agreement nor in disagreement over this, though.

Quebec is a have not province in that you get more from the Federal government than you pay into it. Canada (specifically Ontario and Alberta) subsidize Quebec. Fact.

That, at least, is part of a fear-mongering campaign by the federalist camp in order to scare people off sovereignty. As far as I know, that territory issue could come up, but would have to be ultimately settled by the UN should it arise. And allow me to doubt we would be depossed of electrical centrals WE paid hundreds of billions over the last 20 years.

Well I fail to see how Quebec could make off with territory that was given to them to administer by the Government of Canada, well over half of the province was never part of the New France colony, and the majority of the people up there don't want to leave. So you want the right to go? They have just as much right to stay, to suggest anything else would be hypocritical.

See my previous post regarding these. While I do not think we would suffer much economic turmoil, a little of it is to be expected in the event that we did separate.

Economic turndowns caused by political instability are often side-effects of a fear of a war: civil or otherwise.

But economic interests know Quebec isn't a third world country, and separation would certainly not mean war: neither Canada nor Quebec would want to waste money on that. And both would have much credibility to lose on the internation scene.

Quebec is already being subsidized by the government, combine that with the inevitable downturn, and combine with that all the capital Quebec will have to put out to establish an independant military, foreign service, combine that with their position outside NAFTA. Quebec would be running in the red for a long time.

Anyone else?

Why is it that since I made my "Vive le Quebec Libre!" thread, threads like this have been popping up all over the place?

Why is it that since I made my "Vive le Quebec Libre!" thread, threads like this have been popping up all over the place?
Ummmmm. Why?

Hey hey, answer from a native Quebecer :P

1. Top 5 reasons :D :
-Economical reasons (we loose billions every year)
How so? Please explain and/or supporting documentation.

-Escaping the federation of Canada (The government of Canada keeps appropriating the province's departments, except in Quebec, where we waste billions of dollars in the name of a corrupt government)
Please explain the waste of billions.
-Progress (Quebec has made many social advances in Canada, and has been laughed at at first. Let's just mention the Daycare for young children and the Health Insurance System, which are provincial roles that have been nationalized)
There haven't been social advances in the rest of Canada and as Canadians, isn't it good to share such advances?
-Cultural identity (Quebec is not Canada. But we know we are not having a birth rate high enough to keep the nation alive. That's okay, because it's temporary, a result of the stopping of religious influence. It's going to settle down in the next years, as long as the economy goes better)
If Quebecers are not regenerating themselves, how is it good to leave the Canadian Federation? Canada is officially bilingual and if Quebec were to leave then there is an extremely good chance that bilingualism in the rest of Canada would no longer be a priority, thus diminishing the French culture and influence.
-Quebecers and English Canadians can't live in the same nation (The racism in Canada is soooo high against Quebecers. We talk about the "white niggers of America". So many prejudice I've seen for the past ten years from English Canadians. Two distinct nations cannot live in harmony in the same country. There's only two options: separation or assimilation. I don't think anyone wants to be assimilated.)
Given your statement, how would Quebec assimilate the non Francophone regions of Quebec. 80% of immigrants to Quebec settle in Montreal area....I wonder why that is? BTW, Canada is far more than two distinct nations now, or haven't you noticed?

2. Reasons against
-Keep our rocky mountains! (that's the stupid argument we received in the 1995 referendum. That was sooooo dumb! :D)
Well, that certainly isn't the strongest reason, but Canada as a whole, is one awesome country?

-Red Tape (There's alot of job to do in a new Quebec)
I don't understand? Please clarify.

-Economical reasons (Yes! Some economists think that a sovereign Quebec might have a problem with the industry. I think that's possible, but not worth as much as the expenses we lose because of the Canadian government. We have a particular industries in Quebec, that people can't find elsewhere in the United States. Electricity, Aluminium, etc. An intelligent government can be able to make a sovereign Quebec capable of having a strong economy.)
At present, Quebec receives more in transfer payments than they pay into it. Therefore, there is an automatic economic loss, not to mention Quebec's share of the National debt, establishing a new currency, and the cost of new government institutions.

-English Canadians love us! (Yeah, that's what some people came to tell us at the last referendum. Thing is, they were paid by the Canadian government to do so ;). A small branch of the sponsorships scandal. Thing is, when we go to Canada, we're just being told: Go back to Quebec! Many intelligent people called the Quebecers nazists and anti-semitists. Thing is, jewish schools in Montreal are among the best in Quebec. And we don't want to genocide English Canadians in Quebec, we want our independance for more than just cultural reasons. It's not even the most important argument.)
I think you are overplaying this "we hate Quebec" attitude, because I just don't see it. There are far more French immersion classes than I could ever have imagined. French is on cereal boxes from St. Johns to Victoria. That is certainly a plus for the French culture. French is mandatory in English speaking Provinces, which is another plus.

-Huh?! There's another reason? Well, some English Canadians might want to leave the province.
IF Canada is divisable then so is Quebec. I honestly believe that Quebecers would be in for social unrest year after year, which will make it a political football and a very unattractive climate for immigrants and tourists.

I really do not think that you have made extremely convincing arguments for Quebec separation.

My thoughts on all of this? If the talk of separation ceased, Canada would grow by leaps and bounds. It would be good for ALL Canadians.

Ummmmm. Why?

I dunno. If I knew, I wouldn't ask.

The problem with so many seperatists I think is that they're looking at the economic picture too simply. Yes, Quebec has a sizeable population and has a developed industrial base, etc. However, the creation of a new country with undoubtely create a lot of problems. New currency, new government, new regulations, new laws, new social enviroment, already starting off with a debt, etc is not anything to show an investor that Quebec is the place to be. The corner stone for business expansion relies on stability within the target country which Quebec will not have for a few years, putting them into an economic recession most likely. Also we have to keep in mind that tourism would suffer greatly, as well as having to establish new trade links and get your international standing sorted out. Yes it all seems easy enough to figure out, but in practice governments rarely get so much accomplished and Quebec is certainly not an exception.

I dunno. If I knew, I wouldn't ask.
Ummmm, both of them were started by non Quebecers, so again, I ask why?

You should know the answer.

Quebec is like a woman who is constantly threatening to leave her husband, but who never quite seems to work up the nerve to actually pack her bags and head out the door.

In other words, I'll believe it on the day Quebec actually becomes independent, and not a day sooner.

:rolleyes:

And we could make part of it a Camp Ground, too.
OR, we could....... PLAN A Dump all Canadians into the PAcific ocean and make Canada one large sewage dump
PLan B Make a bigass fence around canada and set the Bird flu in!!!!
Plan C NUKE THE HELL OUT OF CANADA

OR, we could....... PLAN A Dump all Canadians into the PAcific ocean and make Canada one large sewage dump
PLan B Make a bigass fence around canada and set the Bird flu in!!!!
Plan C NUKE THE HELL OUT OF CANADA
Pubescent fantasies?

Pubescent fantasies?
Feed not yonder troll, good sirrah.

Feed not yonder troll, good sirrah.
Oh sire, I wasn't really....I was full of merriment whilst typing the frivolous memo. :D

i would like to point out that the Quebec economy has been in doldrums for decades, a byproduct of too-powerful unions and an unwillingness to raise taxes to pay for social largess (not that im saying social programs are bad, im saying you have to pay for them) a significant difference from scandenavian countries, who also have the advantage of dealing with the various smaller countries of europe.

on another point, if you think quebec can just walk away without a portion of the national debt that quebec politicians helped to create, then you are sorely mistaken.

also given the various extra representation of quebec in the federal government its bs to say that the quebecois are repressed, (extra senate and commons seats, one third of the supreme court, long-serving PMs of recent history Paul Martin, Jean Cretien, Brian Mulroney, and Pierre Trudeau all quebecers)

How so? Please explain and/or supporting documentation.


Please explain the waste of billions.

There haven't been social advances in the rest of Canada and as Canadians, isn't it good to share such advances?

If Quebecers are not regenerating themselves, how is it good to leave the Canadian Federation? Canada is officially bilingual and if Quebec were to leave then there is an extremely good chance that bilingualism in the rest of Canada would no longer be a priority, thus diminishing the French culture and influence.

Given your statement, how would Quebec assimilate the non Francophone regions of Quebec. 80% of immigrants to Quebec settle in Montreal area....I wonder why that is? BTW, Canada is far more than two distinct nations now, or haven't you noticed?


Well, that certainly isn't the strongest reason, but Canada as a whole, is one awesome country?


I don't understand? Please clarify.


At present, Quebec receives more in transfer payments than they pay into it. Therefore, there is an automatic economic loss, not to mention Quebec's share of the National debt, establishing a new currency, and the cost of new government institutions.


I think you are overplaying this "we hate Quebec" attitude, because I just don't see it. There are far more French immersion classes than I could ever have imagined. French is on cereal boxes from St. Johns to Victoria. That is certainly a plus for the French culture. French is mandatory in English speaking Provinces, which is another plus.


IF Canada is divisable then so is Quebec. I honestly believe that Quebecers would be in for social unrest year after year, which will make it a political football and a very unattractive climate for immigrants and tourists.

I really do not think that you have made extremely convincing arguments for Quebec separation.

My thoughts on all of this? If the talk of separation ceased, Canada would grow by leaps and bounds. It would be good for ALL Canadians.

Many debate questions ;). Here, I'll answer some for you.

Economical reasons: In Quebec, we have an environment minister, a health minister, etc. These are Provincial outcomes, but the Federal controls some of the provincial departments in the other provinces. We pay to Canada for an environment minister, when we have one responsible for Quebec. That's where we waste money. It has been an important statement at the last referendum.

Social reasons: I'm personnally on the left-wing. I'm quite alot into social advances. Quebec is very much inspired on other Northern countries, like Finland and Swede, which are on the left-wing. The Liberals compare themselves to America... Left-wingists for certain (no offense)! Canadians have done social advances, I'm sure of it (by the way, please name some for me. I know they've done some, but I don't know about many of them.) However, for example, when public health care came in Quebec, Canadians laughed at the idea. Now, the government of Canada offers a public health system. It has been the same about welfare. The thing different is with our cégeps, nobody adopted our ideas :(. But anyways, I like my good old cégep ^^. One step in between University and High School. We also got a scholarships system in Quebec, thing no other state or province (except BC, if I'm not wrong) has in America (I'm not saying that America outside of Quebec stinks, just that Quebec is alot on the left-wing)). Again, the government of Canada offers scholarships, when the government of Canada has no right to interfere in Provincial departments (such as education).

I can also talk about our nationalized electricity system (I personnally think Ontario should do the same, these companies really rob them). I heard specialists who came from Ontario that it's true that Ontario has a better economy than Quebec, but that no other province, or country, in North America, can pretend to treat the poorer class as well as in Quebec.

The fact of the transfers coming from Canada depends on the time. 10 years ago, we gave more, and 20 years ago, we received approximately as much as we gave. However, since there's the question of biministries, we give money (as we think) for nothing (Sorry if I don't explain things very well, I'm a French Canadian. I was used to speak in English, but it's been some time since I last did. When I give my arguments in French, they're better).

Have you been to Montreal? This is the place I live in. I'll give you what I know about it: half of the immigrants who come to Montreal leave for Ontario or go back to their country. Canada is more than two distinct nations, I agree, but outside Quebec (and maybe New Brunswick), every other province has a majority of English Canadians. I already told it, the cultural reasons are not our main arguments. More and more immigrants agree with sovereignty. And for the French people, it's better to have, to keep our culture in America, a sovereign nation composed by a majority of French people on the continent. The loss of demography from French Canadians is a minor problem. It's a demographical and temporary question. It's not true that people will always have an average 1,5 of natality. We've already have had an average of 8 children per family. I don't like to talk about cultural reasons, it enters in a part where the people think that French Canadians are sovereignists, and English Canadians and immigrants are against. We're working to stop this stereotype. Many French Canadians are against sovereignty, and many immigrants agree with sovereignty. The debate about cultural differences is also uninteresting, because every part has its own arguments, and that they can't be refuted about the others. I could talk to you about the patriots, the assimilation, Mordecai Richler, Globe and Mail propaganda, how you can get served in Japanese in BC, but not in French, hundreds of historical facts, etc. (I'm not being racist about Japanese, by the way, I just want to talk about the "bilinguism" of our country) You can talk to me about the schools, immersion programs, French Canadians outside of Quebec (because there are many, that's true), etc. Thing is, in the end, those are not contradictory arguments, they are just opposite arguments.

The question of the debt and the rebuilding of Quebec is an outstanding issue. I think the members of the PQ and the Bloc should put more energy in it, because it puts the project from "dream" to "possible reality". A few years ago, an economical report, supported by an independant non-sovereignist association, and made by the PQ, supported that the economy of Quebec would be able to have extra income when the province will become a country. However, it doesn't count the loss in the corporations, and the higher cost-price, etc. However, as I said, the economy of Quebec is particular in America. We'll lose money, but not as much as we'll gain.

The Red Tape argument I talked about is that we'll need to rebuild many things. We'll need to start a post system, maybe an army (okay... let's call it a militia ^^), etc. This costs money, I agree.

Sorry my arguments aren't always clear. It's easier for me to explain our reasons in French, I admit ;). I'm not trying to convince you that Quebec should separate (I don't think people from Canada want Quebec to separate and will ever want it. We are too important (just kidding)), but that Quebec HAS REASONS to separate. It's not the same. We're not stupid people, even less racists, nazists, etc. We want a nation, because we hate to struggle with the bi-fundings of two departments (in federal and provincial) of some departments, because we want more social policies, and in a distant argument, that the French Canadians might want their own culture.

Fact: To stop talking about the culture argument, I'll give you one simple fact: there are more and more immigrants in Quebec. The sovereignty is at its highest since 1976. Now tell me, how could it be, since there is a less high perentage of French Canadians than there were in 1976?

YES, Quebec is also dividable. The democracy of Westmount could exist for example. The Kingdom of Eastern Townships, why not? It's true, Quebec could be divided. Thing is, Montreal will remain a Quebecer city. The only region that's massively against sovereignty is the Eastern Townships. And I think it would take many years before they could make themselves a proper advice. Social unrest? Well, actually, we have a 60% of people who are against staying in Canada. That's social unrest also ;). Quebecers are known to be a very pacifist province. How could it be otherwise if they were a country? We'll still be the same people. We won't shapeshift into bloodthirsty monsters. We're against a war between Canada and Quebec. We think it would be unjustified by Canada to attack a sovereign country. If every opposing country had to declare war because they didn't agree at all, USA would've declared war on France, Russia, China, Cuba (all that in the last... 30 years). A conflict doesn't always end up in a war, fortunately.

The argument of social unrest doesn't work, in my opinion, because people will still be the same. I can give you an example: in 1995, we lost the referendum by a diffrence of about 23 000 votes (Less than 2% of difference between "yes" and "nays"). The next day, nobody got too mad (at the point of being violent). Nobody decided to pillage Montreal, destroy it, the police didn't have to intervene, even though if 23 001 more sovereignists had gotten up and decided to vote, we would already be a country, have a seat in the UN, and have signed many conventions between countries. That's a rare sight. That's a small proof of the strong agressivity of French Canadians ;). Quebecers are highly pacifists (Canadians too), and believe in the power of direct democracy.