Quebec sovereignty?

[WLSC]

The other provinces in the past have hated the player (Qc), not the game (keeping the Feds from over-reaching down into provincial business). Now there’s some awakening after an unprecedented period of assumptive superiority and coercive behavior masked as virtuously caring for all…probably could do with more solidarity amongst the provinces.

I didn’t like the political player either but I understood the benefit and maybe the long game and I in all fairness on player side, the “Quebec bashing button” is the ROC scapegoat when the shit it the fan. Let say that all those politicians have missed the boat, big time and now, they are trying to catch up. Have you ever ask why QC voted for Trudeau and Lévesque at the same time?

 

[TacticalTea]

When to group of people are in a riff and the political/influencers loud speachers only point out ''les anglo'' or the ''franco'' instead of trying to resolve issue, you got the situations we have. Of course there's cultural differences, I would argue that les Québecois have more anglosaxon cultural influance then they realised and you might think. Iwould also argue that none are that far away or incompatible.

Right, so no, I'm not blind to our British heritage, I think it makes Quebec quite interesting, and I'd be surprised if an independent Quebec turned away from Common law.

My comment was not meant as some sort of us-v-them diatribe either, I was just rejecting the idea that cultural differences can be simply papered over. I actually don't think the two founding nations are irreconcilable, just that the current constitutional construct is conducive to secessionism.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Right, so no, I'm not blind to our British heritage, I think it makes Quebec quite interesting, and I'd be surprised if an independent Quebec turned away from Common law.

My comment was not meant as some sort of us-v-them diatribe either, I was just rejecting the idea that cultural differences can be simply papered over. I actually don't think the two founding nations are irreconcilable, just that the current constitutional construct is conducive to secessionism.

I would argue its actually the opposite.

Quebecs independence movement has faltered in the last 50 years directly as a result of the changes made to our constitutional construct.

I would argue Quebec lacks any real grievances at this point. They mostly just use the threat of succession to try and leverage more concessions instead of a legitimate threat to separate. Much like Alberta is.

The only real difference being in my opinion Alberta has a lot more to be upset about currently.

 

[WLSC]

Right, so no, I'm not blind to our British heritage, I think it makes Quebec quite interesting, and I'd be surprised if an independent Quebec turned away from Common law.

My comment was not meant as some sort of us-v-them diatribe either, I was just rejecting the idea that cultural differences can be simply papered over. I actually don't think the two founding nations are irreconcilable, just that the current constitutional construct is conducive to secessionism.

I kinda go with you and I blame the sovereignty movement. The constitution was written in a way that the Franco big brother could help all the francos communities all across Canada and QC did until the 60-70 or so then they stopped. It cause much turmoil and resentment. There was a constitutional reason, they killed it because they of reciprocal non interference principles.

 

[WLSC]

The only real difference being in my opinion Alberta has a lot more to be upset about currently.

I mostly agree with you. The founders of the movement where clear, not that they have grievances, it was a explain as a divorce because they felt we were at the end on the union. It was aspirational, not by grievance. It still been fuel by one thing, the Qc bashing. Whatever we do, a portion on the ROC will never accept it expected if we go away or at least get into the line. A bit like the Rep vs the Dem in the States.

That is fuelling a lot and explain a lot of that thread.

I’m more that happy when I see other Province standing up.

 

[KevinB]

I kinda go with you and I blame the sovereignty movement. The constitution was written in a way that the Franco big brother could help all the francos communities all across Canada and QC did until the 60-70 or so then they stopped. It cause much turmoil and resentment. There was a constitutional reason, they killed it because they of reciprocal non interference principles.

Well de Gaulle’s 1967 Montreal City Hall Balcony speech sort of put frosty into the Canadian - French relationship for a bit.

Then PM Pearson replied that no Canadian or Quebecer needed liberating.

 

[WLSC]

Well de Gaulle’s 1967 Montreal City Hall Balcony speech sort of put frosty into the Canadian - French relationship for a bit.

Then PM Pearson replied that no Canadian or Quebecer needed liberating.

De Gaulle had the habit of saying ''Vive le (fill where you want) libre''. He was told not to but is love for the Anglo-saxon world was such that he could not resist to kick the bee's nest. That created the impression of international support for the cause... He could have stayed home IMHO.

 

[GK .Dundas]

One of the truly ironic things that came out of the whole affair of the balcony speech by DeGaulle.
Apparently the only people who were more outraged then the Federal Government were the FLQ.

De Gaulle had the habit of saying ''Vive le (fill where you want) libre''. He was told not to but is love for the Anglo-saxon world was such that he could not resist to kick the bee's nest. That created the impression of international support for the cause... He could have stayed home IMHO.

 

[WLSC]

One of the truly ironic things that came out of the whole affair of the balcony speech by DeGaulle.
Apparently the only people who were more outraged then the Federal Government were the FLQ.

I didn’t heard that one. He even pissed of the FLQ! Wow, what a master lol