Cannon Confronted on “Quebecois” Says Anglos Are NOT Part of Quebec Nation
Lawrence Cannon was asked by Elizabeth Thompson of the Montreal Gazette if this motion applies to all Quebecers.
He just answered no
WOW
Harper better clarify this fast. Cannon is blaming the separatists for proposing it only applies to francophones who got off the boat. He is saying he does not want to froce this decision on anyone. But to say it excludes people doesnt help
Looks like another Cabinet minister may have to go.
More on this soon...
He just answered no
WOW
Harper better clarify this fast. Cannon is blaming the separatists for proposing it only applies to francophones who got off the boat. He is saying he does not want to froce this decision on anyone. But to say it excludes people doesnt help
Looks like another Cabinet minister may have to go.
par / by Anthony à / at 5:29 p.m.
19 Commentaires:
Looks like he knows the definition of Quebecois.
harper today in the house said
Quebec is a nation
and Quebecers are a nation
Harper was clear in Question Period today
The motion isn't about Quebec, of Quebecers. It is about Quebecois, even in the english version of the motion.
The reasons these games are so awful is all these words being thrown around, means different things to different people.
Even some people believe motions should be studied in court decisions (Charest).
This is why it is better not to talk about it - because one can never reach a solution that will both command a mojority of Quebecers, and the majority of Canadians.
* of course I meant 'or Quebecers' not 'of Quebecers'
Yeah, we all know what Quebecois means. No serious analyst thinks it means anything other than French speaking Quebecers. We can debate whether one has to be old stock or not, but those who are Anglophones in Quebec can rarely if ever make the case to be Quebecois.
I think that you're being very close-minded peter
I can't keep up.
Antonio, if you believe Quebec is nation, not an ethnic/sociological nation, a nation defined by political boundaries, call a spade a spade.
If you believe Quebec is a nation, why would you settle for the Quebecois (in your interpretation) being called a nation?
This has always been the problem. Cannon was clear on this yesterday. The PMO was clear on this in their release last week. WHY is anyone surprised? And WHY are Liberals trying to distort this meaning by insisting it is sociological?
I'm not being close-minded Antonio. What I am trying to be is clear-eyed, and I don't know any serious people who would suggest that I, an Anglo in the Plateau with middling French and no Jean Leloup records am a Quebecois.
So, it's not me who is closed.
From http://pmonews.blogspot.com/2006/11/statement_23.html
"Mr. Speaker, the Québécois know who they are.
They know they have contributed to Canada’s founding, development and greatness.
They know they have preserved their unique language and culture and promoted their values and interests within Canada."
By using the word their to describe language, Harper excludes anglo Quebeckers from the Quebecois nationality.
I believe that I am a Quebecer as much as my francophone neighbour.
If some believe that they will not be as Quebecois as the others who have spent their life contributing to this society, they are entitled to do so.
The Quebec nation, like the Canadian nation is inclusive, not exclusive.
Your last comment proves the difficulty - you use member of Quebec Nation, Quebecers and Quebecois interchangably.
As we have seen, your view is not the consensus view. No interpretation is coming out in front.
Just look at this article on what the words multiple meanings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebecois
Kyle nails it on the head. Antonio, I've seen you slide in and out of definitions and it won't do. tell me, are all French Canadians Quebecois? What of the Acadians?
I think Quebec's Language Charter (aka Bill 101 or 178) should be modified to ban the use of the word "Québécois" in English. That way, there would be less confusion.
The interesting thing about the Harper resolution is that if it were legislation, it would be eventually thrown out by the courts because it is not an exact translation.
By the way, I say the spelling of "Quebecker" needs a "k".
He goes on to state with exact precision the year his boat arrived...
Ah well
looks like Jacques Parizeau wasnt the only one who saw italians "le vote ethnique"
Seems like some of you guys still do
Antonio: According to Blackburn, it will be up to the "sovereignists" to determine whether or not you are a Québécois. So, don't you start thinking you have any right to define yourself as a Quebecois, Quebecer!
Loraine Lamontagne
Québécoise-hors-Québec,
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20061128/CPACTUALITES/61128094/1019/CPACTUALITES
The concept of a sociological nation, IMO, is connected to culture, language and history. Extending the concept beyong those things which connect the Quebecois is dangerous as it starts to resemble a geo-political nation. That is why I liked "distinct society" better. It is more inclusive of Anglos and minorities without confering geo-political structures.
Post a Comment
<< Home