Top 1 Reason Jason Cherniak Misunderstands Quebec
Jason’s Listing of Harper’s Top 10 Mistakes include:
3) Raising expectations on the "Fiscal Imbalance";
8) The Québécois Nation;
So…the two biggest steps for federalism in 10 years (since the Clarity Act) are considered mistakes…if we campaign on these so-called mistakes next election, then we are in much bigger trouble than I thought…
Ironically, catering to Quebec is bad, but catering to Ontario is good…reason number 7
7) All but ignoring Dalton McGuinty and the needs of Ontario;
Favoring Quebec = 2 mistakes Not Favoring Ontario = Mistake
No mention of cuts to social programs or the status of women, or to linguistic minorities. No mention of purposely hiding the truth about Giuliano Zaccardelli, but heaven forbid Jason, recognizing a historical fact for Quebecers is far far worse than any of that…
Jason, I used to say you misunderstood Quebec. It’s worse than I thought…apparently, it’s not just Quebec.
3) Raising expectations on the "Fiscal Imbalance";
8) The Québécois Nation;
So…the two biggest steps for federalism in 10 years (since the Clarity Act) are considered mistakes…if we campaign on these so-called mistakes next election, then we are in much bigger trouble than I thought…
Ironically, catering to Quebec is bad, but catering to Ontario is good…reason number 7
7) All but ignoring Dalton McGuinty and the needs of Ontario;
Favoring Quebec = 2 mistakes Not Favoring Ontario = Mistake
No mention of cuts to social programs or the status of women, or to linguistic minorities. No mention of purposely hiding the truth about Giuliano Zaccardelli, but heaven forbid Jason, recognizing a historical fact for Quebecers is far far worse than any of that…
Jason, I used to say you misunderstood Quebec. It’s worse than I thought…apparently, it’s not just Quebec.
par / by Anthony à / at 11:04 p.m.
13 Commentaires:
Antonio,
Be a little more understanding. Jason comes from Toronto. ;-)
Alex
Well, what can I say? I see what's happening here:
Everyone takes his own province too seriously, thus failing to look at the bigger picture.
I think all provinces should be 100% equal and that all that nonsense of special favours here and there must stop - because this is the source of all "evil" and all the problems we have had in this fictitious country called "Canada" so far.
At this point, "Canada" is not real, because it has yet to become reality, and, sadly, we're far from achieving that.
When we start recognizing individual provinces as "nations", we're digging the hole we've been digging ourselves for generations even deeper.
Ignatieff's opening of Pandora's box was a colossal mistake (and shows that he has no place in politics), and Harper played along and aggravated Ignatieff's fatal error.
As I said, either all provinces are equal and there are no more special recognitions, favours, gifts, kowtowing, etc. or Canada as such doesn't exist. And if the latter is true, then hells bells, let this country fall apart, because it wouldn't be worth saving anyway.
Cheers,
Werner
Identity is not fact Antonio, it's feeling. Identity is for individuals to choose, hold and develop. Like I said over and over during that somewhat futile debate, it is the role of MPs to represent their constituents, not to define them.
Please describe how the Quebecois "nation" is a historical fact.
And since you support such definitions, it would be also great if you could tell us, your faithful readership, just exactly who fits into the "historically factual" Quebecois nation and who does not, and according then who has been recognized. I should warn you though that, at least as far as I "know," "facts" tend to have pretty clearly defined parameters and do not mean ten different things to five different people.
Then proceed to enjoy the rest of your holidays!
Talk to you soon I'm sure,
-Braeden
Braeden asks some very relevant questions, Antonio. I'm also extremely intersted in your response - as a Quebecer who does not agree with you, that is. I do agree, though, that Cherniak knows not too much about Quebec - but not for the reasons you list.
I think raising the issue of the fiscal imbalance is a mistake because Harper can never meet the expectations generated. Fiscal imbalance = handouts to the provinces, which means all ten provinces will want a piece, which means nobody will get much, Quebec included.
As for the Quebec nation thing, that was a fluffy meaningless valentine of love from the rest of the country. Enjoy it. It amounts to squat. I'm not sure I agree with Cherniak on the extent of the mistake, however, because I think the whole thing is likely to go away in 2007.
And as for Quebec vs. Ontario, we here in Ontario are used to being ignored by the Feds. We don't whine (much) and never threaten to seperate. Both Quebec and Alberta could learn from our example.
I don't see how you think teo symboloci issues are "favouring" Quebec. Instead of focusing on the meaningless tripe, you should be talking about the details that actually matter.
Hi,
I'm new on the blogosphere, and although it seems to me that you Fuddle Duddle people often reflect a wisdom on Québec issues that may be somewhat too "conventional", at least you do not show the wholesale dismissiveness that I read way too often from your contradictors and I sure commend you for that.
I think the nation thing was an excellent accident, and if a mistake it is actually a strategic one, as it will allow Stéphane Dion (if he goes on as he's started) to display a completely different persona than what nationalists expected here (and probably many "one-nation" fundamentalists elsewhere).
As to the fiscal imbalance, I think it is way too early to know how this will turn out, and whether or not the Conservatives made a mistake will certainly depend on how the federal Libs can sell the idea in Québec that they would do better (which should include showing that they would give them better bang for their federal tax buck).
Oh, and I don't think there is such a thing as a source of all "evil". Good grief, this is politics, not religion.
Antonio how long is it that your family has been in Quebec???
Top One Reason Jason Misunderstands Quebec: Most of English Canada does.
Top One Reason Antonio Misunderstands The ROC: Most of Quebec does.
Braeden, dont make it sound like I havent answered that question hundreds of times...
A quebecer is a person who lives in Quebec. There is no quebec citizenship bcause Quebec is not a country. Is a person who moves here Canadian the moment they step off a plane? If we are never this philosophical about the Canadian identity, why do people get so defensive when we refer to Quebec's identity?
How do I misunderstand the rest of Canada? By saying Canadian identity is not altered by the existence of a Quebec identity?
What Harper did (and indirectly, what Ignatieff started) was years ahead of its time, and will definitely have long term consequences. Time will tell if they are positive or negative. However, twenty years down the road, after the constitution is amended to reflect this reality and Quebec becomes a signatory to the Charter, some people are gonna look mightily dumb.
Shoshana, my mother arrived in 1961 and my father in 1975. You want to accuse them of genocide too?
Rather than ask Antonio, a new resident of Quebec, what makes Quebec unique, why not ask why the other 9 provinces and 3 territories are not unique? It seems Antonio is defining Quebec as a nation not based on a French culture which would exclude him but rather on some ephemeral differentness that somehow includes everyone inside the physical borders of Quebec yet excludes everyone else. Hey, I'm just a Westerner with no understanding of Quebec but it seems to me that Antonio and his Quebec nation are special because they are special. It's too damn much Sesame Street, I think, because when everyone is special, no one is.
I love it how I can be considered a new Quebecer when I was born and raised here.
By saying somehow I am less Quebecer than my fellow citizens, is using ethnic nationalism, and border-line discrimination.
Hey rat, do yourself a favor and pick up Blood and Belonging, and read all about how ethnic nationalism is divisive and destroys countries.
On another note, happy new year to everyone.
Do you think the #1 criticism of blogs is that they refer to blogs?
Post a Comment
<< Home