November 1, 2006

La nation remise en perspective...

Bernard Landry doit rire dans sa barbe. Mes collègues libéraux du ROC sont tombés dans le piège que Bernard Landry leur avait tendu. En appuyant la position soutenue par Michael Ignatieff, il s'assurait d'un backlash certain dans le Canada-Anglais. Il tentait donc de s'assurer que la résolution sur la reconnaissance de la nation québécoise soit rejetée au congrès de décembre.

Je demeure convaincu qu'il voit dans l'ouverture de l'aile québécoise du PLC une menace importante au dogme séparatiste. Malheureusement, les libéraux des autres provinces sont tombés dans le panneau. Le raisonnement des opposants est simpliste. La lettre de M. Landry nous permettait facilement de remettre en question la raison même du séparatisme. Il parlait du Québec comme d'une nation émancipée et qui avait tous les outils nécessaires à sa prospérité. Pourquoi donc se séparer si le Québec s'est si bien développé dans le cadre fédéral ?

Certains candidats ont décidé de casser du sucre sur le dos du Québec afin de faire des progrès dans le reste du pays. C'est triste et irresponsable comme attitude. Si le PLC souhaite regagner le pouvoir, ça passe essentiellement par une performance décente au Québec. Je trouve déplorable qu'un certain candidat ait pris un virage à 180 dans sa position de la reconnaissance formelle de l'existence de la nation québécoise. Avec une performance TRÈS moyenne au Québec, l'ex-néo-démocrate a décidé de tenter de faire des gains ailleurs au pays aux dépens du Québec. So much pour l'ami du Québec, celui qui comprend le Québec parce qu'il a fait du porte-à-porte au cours de deux référendums... Doit-on croire que les milliers de gens qui ont afflué à Montréal le 27 octobre 1995, pour le love-in, ont une connaissance profonde du Québec ?

Je suis déçu de la tournure du débat sur la nation. Ce n'était pas une question de campagne à la direction. C'est une initiative qui vient de la base militante du Parti. Ce fut adopté par plus des deux tiers de la salle du Conseil général, bien plus que le nombre de supporters d'Ignatieff présents.

Alex Plante

24 Commentaires:

Blogger Wah Fist a dit...

Undoubtedly, it was more than just the supporters of Iggy voted for the resolution.
Unfortunately, Iggy immediately claimed victory making it his leadership issue.

I think the resolution will probably be sunk in Montreal.

It would be helpful for supporters to explain the difference between the Quebec 'nation' and the province?

If you could call the nation something other than 'Quebec', it might be easier to build support because it would alleviate fears that this all really just a ploy to give the province additional constitutional powers.

11/01/2006 1:47 AM  
Blogger Altavistagoogle a dit...

Ça fait partie de la game. Les Canadiens-anglais veulent le status quo, mais pas les Amérindiens et pas les Québécois.

Faut dire aussi que plusieurs ont peur que le statut de "nation" dans la constitution puisse éventuellement être utilisé pour permettre la loi sur l'affichage (qui bénificie présentement de la clause temporaire non-obstante).

C'est une crainte légitime.

11/01/2006 7:39 AM  
Blogger big gay al's big gay liberal sanctuary a dit...

Alex, since Antonio doesn't have the courage to answer the question, maybe you will.

Is Newfoundland a NATION? It has a distinct culture and history and joined Canada pretty late. Should it be recognized in the constitution as well?


If Quebec is to be recognized as a Nation, then shouldn't Newfoundland?

What about Manitoba? It has a strong Metis history and culture distinct from the rest of Canada. Should Manitoba be recognized as a distinct Nation in the Constitution?


ANSWER THE QUESTION

11/01/2006 8:09 AM  
Blogger WestmountLiberal a dit...

La Presse: "Le député d'Outremont invite donc tous les candidats à la direction du PLC à éviter de «casser du sucre sur le Québec» en critiquant cette fameuse résolution qui sera débattue au congrès de Montréal, le mois prochain"

Interesting that Alex is now quoting Jean Lapierre.

11/01/2006 10:13 AM  
Blogger Alex Plante a dit...

Westmountliberal,

Si vous étiez un peu plus ouvert à la culture francophone, vous sauriez que l'expression "casser du sucre" est relativement commune.

Je ne cite donc pas Jean Lapierre en particulier. Si vous fouillez dans mes textes précédents, vous trouverez probablement cette locution.

En passant, Jean Lapierre a habituellement un bon vocabulaire donc je ne me gênerai pas d'utiliser les mêmes mots, ça ne veut pas dire que je partage toujours ses idées...

Alex

11/01/2006 10:23 AM  
Blogger big gay al's big gay liberal sanctuary a dit...

Alex, since Antonio doesn't have the courage to answer the question, maybe you will.

Is Newfoundland a NATION? It has a distinct culture and history and joined Canada pretty late. Should it be recognized in the constitution as well?

If Quebec is to be recognized as a Nation, then shouldn't Newfoundland?

What about Manitoba? It has a strong Metis history and culture distinct from the rest of Canada. Should Manitoba be recognized as a distinct Nation in the Constitution?


ANSWER THE QUESTION

11/01/2006 10:39 AM  
Blogger big gay al's big gay liberal sanctuary a dit...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

11/01/2006 10:39 AM  
Blogger big gay al's big gay liberal sanctuary a dit...

Alex,

What about Antonio's riding of Saint-Leonard? It has a distinct culture from the rest of Canada. Many of its resident are Italian or have Italian origins and the Italian language is spoken by many of its residents. Italian culture is prominent, superceeding Franco-Quebec culture, or Canadian for that matter.

Should Saint-Leonard be recognized as a Nation? It is rather distinct from anywhere else in Canada.


ANSWER THE QUESTION

11/01/2006 10:40 AM  
Blogger WestmountLiberal a dit...

Alex
In the English culture we have a term called "irony".

Here's a couple of definitions for you:
i. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
ii. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.

Et voila, nothing personal. I understand your culture. In fact, I like your culture.

I just found it interesting that your argument used the EXACT same vocabulary of someone that this blog implied supported a candidate other than Ignatieff.

11/01/2006 12:36 PM  
Blogger anybody but iggy a dit...

YEAH!

ANSWER THE QUESTION.

11/01/2006 12:44 PM  
Blogger canuckistanian a dit...

warning, warning: don't answer the question. not a good idea. answering it can only show how stupid this quebec resolution is. so please, do all you can to pretend you didn't see the question.

as an aside, kinda funny how the iggiots are now saying "2/3 supported the resolution" when it used to be "80% supported the resolution". still have yet to see the official count. also, if only 2/3 of the people there, widely acknowledged as a stacked room, supported it...it would seem to be a bit of a stretch to say that it is overwhelmingly popular. then again, it would seem to make perfect sense, as all of the iggy hq's talking points stress that up is down, black is white...so you see in iggyland, overwhelming means underwhelming...its all starting to make sense now.

11/01/2006 1:33 PM  
Blogger big gay al's big gay liberal sanctuary a dit...

Antonio and Alex, I put it together so you'll have an easier time reading it and answering it.


Is Newfoundland a NATION? It has a distinct culture and history and joined Canada pretty late. Should it be recognized in the constitution as well?

If Quebec is to be recognized as a Nation, then shouldn't Newfoundland?

What about Manitoba? It has a strong Metis history and culture distinct from the rest of Canada. Should Manitoba be recognized as a distinct Nation in the Constitution?

What about Antonio's riding of Saint-Leonard? It has a distinct culture from the rest of Canada. Many of its resident are Italian or have Italian origins and the Italian language is spoken by many of its residents. Italian culture is prominent, superceeding Franco-Quebec culture, or Canadian for that matter.

Should Saint-Leonard be recognized as a Nation? It is rather distinct from anywhere else in Canada.


ANSWER THE QUESTION

11/01/2006 1:44 PM  
Blogger Gavin Neil a dit...

Les Quebecois forment une nation... meme le peuple de terre-nouveau, meme les acadies, meme les metis, etc. Le Quebec n'est pas une nation, c'est une province du Canada. Le Quebec et les Quebecoise ne sont pas egal.

G

11/01/2006 2:50 PM  
Blogger ottlib a dit...

big gay als...

What a large handle. I hope you will forgive me for being too lazy to write it all out.

I will try to give you an answer to your question from my own perspective.

I have seen all of the arguments against Quebec being a nation. They are logical, cogent, and intelligent and on an intellectual and emotional level I agree with them. However, they all fail to answer a very important question, namely, "What is the perception within Quebec?

You mention all sorts of jurisdictions and political entities that have different cultures, traditions and history but you forget to ask if the people in these entities have a sense that they are a nation.

So, is their a consensus amongst Newfoundlanders that they are a nation? Manitobans? Ontarians? Albertans?

There is an intangible quality to nationhood and that is a sense of belonging to one. There are many places that meet the logical criteria of being a nation but none of them are considered to be nations mainly because the people living there do not consider it to be one.

Would anybody suggest Hawaii or Alaska are nations separate from the American one? They meet the objective criteria so why are they not considered nations?

Why is Canada considered a nation? Our country is huge with many disparate cultures and traditions yet we are still considered a nation. Why? Because its people have a sense of belonging to the Canadian nation.

Although it is painful we have been watching the evolution of Quebec society over the last half century and it has reached a point where they now consider themselves to be a nation.

We cannot turn that clock back so our challenge as Canadians will be to deal with this reality in a constructive manner.

As I have stated before we can follow the Conservative model, which is to loosen the federation to the point where the Canadian sense of nation will begin to erode or we can come up with another alternative. Just be clear that such an alternative will require acknowledging Quebec nationhood as a necessary step. Being in denial is no longer an option.

I have no idea on what else to do and neither do any of the leadership candidates. And that is the unfortunate part in all of this. We had an opportunity to begin a meaningful debate on how to handle this issue but instead Liberals let it degenerate into just another partisan fight between leadership candidates.

11/01/2006 3:12 PM  
Blogger anybody but iggy a dit...

I think plenty of people within Newfoundland consider themselves a nation.

11/01/2006 4:46 PM  
Blogger canuckistanian a dit...

ottlib:

yes there is consensus amongst newfoundlanders that they are a nation in the sociological sense...native hawaiins are also in agreement that the are a nation and have been trying for a long time to have that recognized by the US congress. there are lots of nations in canada. why would we recognize one and not the others? the fact of the matter is, canada does recognize all the nations in the country. why we would move away from multiculturalism to balkanized nationalism is beyond me?

11/02/2006 2:33 PM  
Blogger cat mutant a dit...

The fact that you guys don't answer the nation critics really displays the weakness of your position. Ignatieff will loose because he wants to balkanize Canada. Canada is multicultural... you can't start defining nations left and right, it will only lend credibility to separtists that a nation should be a separate country. If you can't see that, I'm obviously wasting my time with this comment.

11/02/2006 3:08 PM  
Blogger Wah Fist a dit...

Thank you Gavin. I agree.

11/02/2006 11:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

An interesting perspective on the debate today from www.uni.ca (Not my writing):


Perspective on the "Quebec as a nation" debate

We wanted to write something about Arctic Sovereignty. What an interesting new concept. How timely. How romantic. Far away, alien landscapes, warming away under the weight of the world's greatest environmental threat, opening new waterways that could dwarf the traffic of the Panama Canal; "military" icebreakers chasing nuclear submarines. And there we are, Canada, Defender of the North, staring down the Danes, admonishing American ambassadors, looking across to the Russians and the Chinese in a very close circle colder than a cold war. Top of the world Ma! Top of the World!

But no, you just couldn't leave it alone for a week. One week so we could write something sexy for a change. Now this vote grabber from the Quebec Liberals and we have to focus yet again on troubleshooting the offending script in our national program "Quebec <"equals"> <"does not equal"> Nation".

It is not that complicated. That is unless you have a hidden agenda trying to use sociological concepts to lead others into a legal trap. Quebec is what it is. Always was, always will be. Oversimplification? No, it's a form of Open federalism, also called "Cosmonationalism" which we coined here at Uni.ca many years ago but which has always been a truth as true as logic in a debate overwrought with emotion.

Cosmonationalism accepts that multiple identity layers within one person or group can exist without negating or detracting from each other. It means that identities can coexist in mutual support. It means that I can be from my family, my neighbourhood, my city, my province, my country, my continent, my species, my planet and beyond. I don't have to choose one over the other, and my family, neighbourhood, planet, do not have to be "better" then anyone else's to have "value".

Of course Quebec is a unique geographic and sociological area. The people that live there constitute an identifiable group. That is one reason they already have a strong, well-identified political unit of their own, called the "Province of Quebec".

Quebecois today are not an oppressed people by any measure but the most absurd. How insulting it must feel to the truly-oppressed in Darfur and Iraq and elsewhere, who hear the language of the oppressed so over used and abused in Canada. Quebec has genuine avenues of expression and affect for all manners of cultural and political rights and social desires. They have not only the respect and recognition of their neighbours, but even love and envy. Quebec is what it is, so when someone asks you to place a label, if it is just labeling reality, what is it for?

The label of "Nation" is being used by secessionists precisely because it is imprecise. Of course Quebec is a nation by some definition. But if political leaders canonize that into law, it becomes the basis for secession. If they refuse, it is a national insult that some say should be returned with secession.

Do not fall into this trap. The question is moot. Quebec is what it is, and it is great. It is its own history and future, and it is part of the history and the future of the great country and the great peoples of Canada. It will not miraculously break-off and float into the North Atlantic no matter what referendum says yes or no to whatever obscure question that one group of politicians or another have formed to best serve their political interests.

Quebeckers, Canadians, wake-up, get focused, deal with today's priorities today and we can play semantics and legalism and budget imbalancing later. We have much work to do, our planet is melting, people are dying needlessly, damn it, Canada is at War needlessly! And while you're getting your little labelmaker ready to tell our people who is who and what group is separate from others, the rest of the world is trying to get together.

11/03/2006 3:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous a dit...

I like this part most, it's a great argument, the kind that really makes you think twice:



"Of course Quebec is a unique geographic and sociological area. The people that live there constitute an identifiable group. That is one reason they already have a strong, well-identified political unit of their own, called the "Province of Quebec"."

11/03/2006 3:25 AM  
Blogger lance a dit...

Ottlib said: "Why is Canada considered a nation? Our country is huge with many disparate cultures and traditions yet we are still considered a nation. Why? Because its people have a sense of belonging to the Canadian nation."

No, it isn't because of a warm-fuzzy about belonging, that might be the result, but it isn't the impetus.

It's because different peoples came together and bleed on battlefields to prove that we were qualified to be called a nation.

Cheers,
lance

11/03/2006 11:48 PM  
Blogger anybody but iggy a dit...

Alex and Antonio have no real position, they are just backing Iggy in hopes of furthering their own careers - like the rest of QC backers.
If they had any balls (or brains) they could have answered this question (is NFLD a nation?) a long time ago.

11/03/2006 11:50 PM  
Blogger anna yanuk a dit...

looks like the poodle is following the brown-noser's commands

good boy!

11/04/2006 5:57 PM  
Blogger canuckistanian a dit...

have you guys banned me from your site? not very nice if true. i have tried numerous times accessing it from different computers, but cannot open it. interesting that i can access your archived posts though. if i'm no longer allowed on here, i have to say that i will miss the spin. it is top notch, and would make a whirling dervish dizzy.

11/06/2006 6:06 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home