Saying that Quebeckers are a nation is equivalent to saying Quebec is a nation, which is the separtist view. On the other hand, equating nation with the Quebecois is a recognition of the French fact in Quebec but not of the nation-state.
Posted at 2006-11-23 18:46:59 [PermaLink]Mark,
I think the resolution Harper has put forward needs to be looked at in the context in which it was put forward. The Bloc and Ignatieff had been suggesting that Quebec as a whole constituted a "nation". This is an explicably seperatist notion as Quebec being a multi-ethnic province could only be a civic as opposed to an ethnic nation. Hence by using the term Quebecois it acknowledges the distinctiveness of French Canadians within the province of Quebec and that they constitute a sociological nation while implicitedly denying that they constitute a civic nation which I would gather is why Gilles Duceppe was so angry about the whole thing. - Chris
Mark:
To me Richler is as Quebecois as poutine ;)
Ya know this 'controsersey has parallels with Spain and Catalunya.
In any case, I've always regarded Quebec as a nation and I'm a federalist. I also regard the rest of Canada as a nation too. It's possible for 2 nations to coexist (cf Switzerland. The inability for contemporary states to tolerate differences exposes the shallowness of modernity.
xavier
Spot on, Mark. Sure hope Harper has a plan...
Posted at 2006-11-24 00:26:55 [PermaLink]Yes, this is spot on and not a lot of people in the MSM are looking at the wording of what Harper said.
In my view, using the word "Québécois" rather than "Québec" is significant, but I don't yet know if it was intentional or not. I also don't know how this will play out here in Québec where, let's admit it, many "Québécois" would never consider Richler as being one of them.
I'm anxious to see how this angle plays out.
The probleme with all this nonsense is that there are, in fact, two Quebecs.
The one is to be found "on-island" and is characterised by a multi-ethnic, multi-linguistic flavour.
The other "off-island" Quebec is unilingual, *uni-ethnic* and solidly white/francophone.
I lived 11 years in rural Quebec and about 16 "on-island", and I can awssure you that rural Quebeckers view Montreal as slightly foreign; the place is to be approached with a certain caution!
As for Richler's identity; the issue is quite complicated. Rather than ask whether the francos consider him one of their own, we need to ask Richler whether he feels he's one of "them".
If one can reproach the guy for something, it's that fact that despite having spent most of his life in Montreal he died berift of the ability to string together even three of four words of french. He did, on the other hand, understand it and read it quite well.
But then Richler is typical of an "on-island" Quebecker.
John Palubiski: A brilliant comment by ET on the realities of Quebec at SDA.
[External Link]
Mark
Ottawa
I liked what William Watson wrote in today's 'National Post':
[Quote]
....the speech I liked best was Gilles Duceppe's. "We are what we are, period," echoing the show-stopping "I am what I am," from -- what could be more appropriate? -- La Cage aux Folles.
When our own cage aux folles reconvenes next week, I hope MPs will consider the following philosophically impeccable substitute for Mr. Harper's motion: "Resolved, that this House recognize that Quebecers are what they are, period, and so is everyone else in the Canadian nation."
[Unquote]
ET is pretty much correct in his analysis, Mark, but what can anyone do?
I'm not afraid to cross party lines, so for what it's worth Mulroney has a great deal to answer for. Bouchard, the founder of the Blok, was a cabinet minister in that PC gov't, and it is significant to remember that Bouchard announced his defection while hob-nobbing with French politicians in Paris.
It was Mulroney who cut the deal with jaded, dsigruntled separatists, so he was either completely deluded/tricked or he was a cynical, shady opportunist who'd sacrifice the country's security for shot-term gain.
In post 60s Quebec *nation* and *language* have replaced faith and religion; the Blok, thus, is both clerical and political, its platform of independance an almost messianic quest.
Of course all this quasi-religious sentiment, this wavering and indecision as pertains to the proper path of political "salvation"; all this is being subsidised by the ROC.
Quebec won't stay, but neither will it leave. Ever since French Canada's founding nearly 4 centuries ago it has lurched from colonial master to colonial master, always making sure it enjoyed the security and safety of an imperial framework, yet also making sure that that framework provided plenty of wiggle-room.
IMHO, were the province ever to change its political status that change would involve linking up with the U.S. as a resource-rich semi-autonomous dependancy.
What can one say?
La Belle Province is a 400 year-old adolescent...
I'm an anglo living in Montreal, and I agree that the choice of the word Quebecois versus Quebec is critical. The sovereignists have had it their own way for far too long, arguing on the one hand that they are a people and on the other hand an inclusive civic nation. It is a massive lie, and this wording will force them a little further out from their cover. The sovereignty movement is an uncomfortable alliance of xenophobes (Marois), racists (Parizeau) and power hungry nihilists(Boisclair). They will be forced to alternate between pride that white francophone Quebec is a nation and faux humiliation that they've left behind those ethnic voters they were counting on. I would never accept membership of a Quebec nation, and to lump me into a Quebec nation would undermine my civic rights as a proud Canadian. But if the francophones in Quebec are happy to seperate themselves fron the other francophones in Canada and call themselves a nation; fill yer boots. Just remember, you don't speak for me. I live in Quebec, I pay Quebec taxes, I am not and never will be a part of the Quebecois nation.
Posted at 2006-11-25 14:39:41 [PermaLink]"Clearly, in French usage in Quebec, Québécois means "pertaining to those people living in Quebec, speaking French, who constitute--and feel themselves part of--a Québécois nation". Hence the Parti and Bloc Québécois. Québécois obviously does not mean just an habitant of the province. The word is exclusionary in effect."
That's not correct. Québecois refers to a person living in the political entity that is Quebec. Usually, when refering to those of early french heritage, some adjective is added, like "de souche".