Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: sian, west wales
Date: 19 Apr 02 - 10:33 AM

I've never liked this Anglos vs. Francos business. It's wildly misleading. The Canadian population is, apparently, British Isles origin 28%, French origin 23%, other European 15%, Amerindian 2%, other, mostly Asian, African, Arab 6%, mixed background 26%. My Dad always wrote "Welsh" on any official Canadian forms; my mum, in her youth, was one of the back-lash generation who began to refuse to use "British" for 'origin' and insisted on saying "Canadian".

I also seem to remember an Albertan French-Canadian once telling me that they didn't like Quebecois claiming to speak for all French Canadians.

Ain't life in the cultural mosaic grand?

sian

(one small tile)

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Apr 02 - 09:05 AM

"A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user." Theodore Roosevelt

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Leeder
Date: 18 Apr 02 - 11:44 AM

By coincidence, yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the repatriation.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 05:52 PM

The referenda can be a bit misleading too...an important consideration is this: What exactly was the wording of the key question...or questions...in a particular referendum...and how did that affect the way people voted?

Politicians always try to word a referendum question in a manner that will manipulate people in the direction those politicians who are presenting the referendum would find most desirable.

"Chicanery" it's called.

Both sides of an issue should actually get to pose the key questions in their own chosen wording...and I suggest that if they did so, they might well BOTH "win"!

You see this kind of nonsense quite frequently in public opinion polls, where the questions are cleverly worded to elicite the desired answers.

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Leeder
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 02:50 PM

Mike, I was simplifying things for ease of explanation. Thanks for clarifying further. Also, certainly Trudeau and Chrétien were/are federalists, and were involved in the 1982 Constitution. I never meant to imply that all québécois are separatists, in fact only a minority are (albeit a large minority, as of the last referendum).

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 12:14 PM

Thanks for all of this Leeder, LH, Mike Regenstreif, and GUEST. It's very interesting, and I think I'm beginning to understand a little bit.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 10:47 AM

Mike... Both Trudeau and Chretien knew that the only way seperation could be viewed as legal in the eyes of the world, was if they repatriated the constitution. Now in the International courts, Quebec has a case to open as an independant nation if it decides not to accept any constitution formed by the rest of Canada. In addition to this, the largest single ammount of unencumbered capital in the world is the Quebec pension plan. Enough of which could be used to form an economy.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Mike Regenstreif
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 10:00 AM

Leeder,

Your statement, "Quebec, just to be difficult, refused to sign the Constitution (although it was adopted in the rest of the country according to the amending formula), and things like the Charter of Rights and Freedoms have no formal effect in Quebec," is incorrect.

Despite the fact that Quebec's provincial government has not signed the constitution, the Constitution of Canada, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is fully in effect here in Quebec.

There have been many court cases in Quebec that have used the Charter. Also, in 1989, the Quebec provincial governmnet invoked the constitutional "notwithstanding clause" to temporarily override the Charter with its language laws (since amended to conform with the Charter).

Despite the fact that Quebec's provincial government did not sign the Constitution, it should be noted that 74 of Quebec's 75 members of the federal Parliament did vote their approval and that public opinion polls at the time showed that a vast majority of the public here in Quebec did support patriation.

It should also be noted that the two federal politicians most responsible for bringing the Constitution back to Canada, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau and Justice Minister Jean Chretien, were both members of Parliament from Quebec ridings.

Mike Regenstreif

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 01:09 AM

Well explained, Leeder. It is ambitious and unscrupulous Quebec politicians that are responsible for most of this rumpus in my opinion...not the Quebec population in general. When you say that some Quebecers just want the "rest of Canada to go away", it's ironical, because that's sort of how many of the people in the rest of Canada feel about them too! :-) (Not that they actually want the country to break up...they just wish the Bloc Quebecois would "go away")

I don't worry about it too much...there are much more serious matters at hand most of the time, but I am pretty disgusted at the behaviour of politicians who keep inflaming petty issues just to advance their own careers and increase their sense of self-importance.

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Leeder
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:45 PM

The questions are getting tougher. I'm trying to put myself inside the head of a Quebec politician, and not particularly succeeding.

The main objection of some Quebecers (politicians or people) to all this seems to be, as I said earlier, that they just want the rest of Canada to go away. The question whether or not a given law is beneficial to them is irrelevant.

The Charter is much like the Bill of Rights in the U.S. It spells out basic human rights and freedoms. All laws are subject to it. Some people object to it on the basis that the courts are given the power to overturn laws, or parts of laws, which run counter to the Charter, therefore the judicial branch acquires supremity over the legislative branch. They may be right. The Charter may go too far in this direction -- especially since the judges are appointed and paid by the government, rather than being elected, as in the U.S. In any event, I think the Charter's heart is in the right place, and the questions about it are merely questions of administration.

Again, I don't think the Quebec government wants to return to a constitution amended in Britain, they just want a reason to object to anything coming out of the rest of Canada.

Hoping (against hope) that clarifies things a bit... But it helps me clarify my thinking a bit as well.

By the way, I don't think the majority of the Quebec population feel this way, just certain politicians (Bloc québécois federally, Parti québécois provincially -- unfortunately they form the provincial government) and those who support them.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:01 PM

Thanks Leeder!

I'm less confused than I was, and definitely more intrigued. Can you handle a couple more questions?

Do the people in Quebec think that not having the Constitution apply to them benefits them in some way? If so, how would it benefit them?

What's the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and why wouldn't the people in Quebec want that to apply to them?

Do the people in Quebec want the Canadian Constitution to only be amendable by the British Parliament? In what way would this benefit them?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Leeder
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 10:25 PM

No one really answered CarolC's questions from a few days back.

The Governor General approves all federal legislation. No federal law is in effect until the G-G has signed it (although the Sovereign could do it him- or herself if he or she happened to be in Canada at the time -- but that rarely happens). The catch is that the G-G has no choice, but can delay legislation by stalling for a bit. Also, after an election the G-G appoints the new Prime Minister, who is almost invariably the leader of the party with the most elected members. It is possible, where there is a "minority government", i.e., no party has a clear majority, for the head of the second-place party to demonstrate that another party will co-operate with them, so the G-G may recognize that person as Prime Minister instead. This has happened in the past, occasionally. It's supposed to be the person who has the most support in Parliament who becomes Prime Minister. This is "responsible government", and in fact was invented in Canada, where it worked well enough that Britain adopted it.

Other than this, the G-G's functions are almost entirely ceremonial.

If you read about this when I wrote about it in a previous thread, skip the next bit. Even though I'm a year removed from my former job as an editor in the legal field, I can still be boring without trying too hard.

Re "patriation of the Constitution": Canada's first Constitution was an Act of the British Parliament (ironically, since Britain has no written Constitution), and could only be amended by Britain. In Pierre Trudeau's time, the present Constitution was developed, and "repatriated" from Britain, so it can be amended in Canada. The last formal tie with Britain was thus severed. However, Quebec, just to be difficult, refused to sign the Constitution (although it was adopted in the rest of the country according to the amending formula), and things like the Charter of Rights and Freedoms have no formal effect in Quebec. It's an nomalous position, but federal laws still seem to have effect in Quebec. They grumble about it from time to time, and every once in a while mount a referendum against it, when they think they can win. They haven't so far. But they still pretend the Constitution doesn't apply to them, even though they follow it.

Confused yet?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 11:42 PM

I love it when threads like this one go totally adrift and still manage to get in some Canadian content... :-)

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,#6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:17 PM

Sorry for going off Blackcatter. (But clear you weren't.)

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 09:13 PM

Not Jimminy Cricket then?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 08:44 PM

JC=John Cleese.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 08:22 PM

... Christianity

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 08:19 PM

Well, I know a Dwayne Chase from Chipman, NB who races but I didn't think t'were him. I don't follow the roundyround... not real racing to me.

JC is the 2ic in Chritianity.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:41 PM

(What's JC?)

I think Dwayne's last name is Jones. At least that's what it says on his Nascar car truck thingie. But I don't really know for sure. He's one of your guys (NB).

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:35 PM

Great JC CC ! Ye's a true hoser, bar none maid ! Now, what's Dwayne's last name ?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Blackcatter
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:24 PM

GUEST,#6(b);

I meant that the people who seem to be upset about sending or not sending condolences about the death of the Queen Mother should maybe focusing on things such as the plight of the poor.

It was a comment. I have important things to say, but rarely say them - I prefer action. That is why I spend today visiting a friend in the hospital, feeding the homeless and volunteering at a local museum.

Actions speak louder than words - But I'm sure you know that - I'm sure you are a responsible human and help out all that you can.

pax yall

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 07:03 PM

Don Cherry's dog, Blue (scroll down a little bit)

Also... Dwayne's Homepage

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 06:40 PM

Coach's Corner is the best part of HNIC !

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 06:21 PM

Carol - Don Cherry the hockey guy, eh? Once a player, then a coach, now a legendary hockey commentator and eccentric character extraordinaire! There is no one else like Don Cherry, the guy is a riot. He likes being outrageous and puts on a great show, talking tough... like John Wayne on too much maple syrup. :-) And his dog is cute too!

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: gnu
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 06:06 PM

Leeder said... It's all about money, folks.

Yup. Those who can separate La Belle Province will be rich beyond their wildest of dreams. Quebec stands ready to deliver natural resources a plenty, especially fresh water to the "Tri-State" area of New England. Court battles loom in Canada over the export sale of water by private entities, but are being kept hush-hush and on the back burner. Awful thing... to look at this grand nation which has strived for equality and peace for all... now only to see policies and legislation being implemented which can only sum up to greed imposed on the poor by the rich.

As for Her Majesty, what really pisses me off is that the average Canuck has no idea of what it really means to be an integral part of the Commonwealth - the only reason we haven't "joined" the US is because we are a Commonwealth nation, part of the largest military force on the earth. BTW, did you notice what the Royal family was wearing at the Queen Mum's funeral ? Any thoughts on what the Royal Family's REAL role is within the Empire ? Anyone REALLY want to piss them off ? Including the Bloc ?

Anyway, back to a few LaBatt's beers.... they brew Bud here in Canada.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 04:13 PM

Don Cherry the hockey

Don Cherry the jazz

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 04:08 PM

Hey LH... Don Cherry the hocky, or Don Cherry the jazz?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 03:04 PM

The Governor General maintains a dignified demeanour, wears expensive clothing, gives speeches now and then, travels here and there, and meets various important people. That's about it.

It's a very cool job! Almost as much fun as being Don Cherry, but not nearly as exciting, of course. :-)

If we are subjects of the queen...then who are her objects? I also find her far preferable to Jean Chretien as supreme leader of Canada...

I agree with Leeder that the problem with Quebec is not its people, but its politicians! They are a greedy, opportunistic bunch of scoundrels intent on robbing the Quebecois AND the federal government at the same time, and playing both ends against the middle. So far they have done quite well at it. For this, they are despised in English Canada. This feeling unfortunately sometimes spills over into a general anti-French bias among the less intelligent members of the Anglo community (and that is to the advantage of the Quebec politicians, who thrive on such discord).

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 02:26 PM

Juventude Lusitana was formed in 1995, with the intention of divulging the benefits of the monarchical form of government amongst the younger population, and to try and unite the young Portuguese Monarchists in a nation-wide association. The Board of Juventude Lusitana, as well as all it's members, firmly believe that the restoration of the Monarchy would be advantageous to the country. That belief is not based on faith, nostalgia or social class. A detailed look at Portugal's and World history, and a comparative study of Portugal's political conditions and those of other world countries show that we are right. Many of our members are converted Republicans, or people who were indifferent and have been enlightened. Our weapon is debate and it is with that weapon that we have had our greatest victories. Juventude Lusitana has no political colour, and amongst it's members one can find supporters of different political parties, left or right.

Unfortunately, there exists in Portugal, especially amongst the younger generation (but not only) a general ignorance about the different types of regime. This ignorance leads to conformity and leads many people to criticise and distance themselves from the Monarchist ideal, without really knowing what they're talking about. Juventude Lusitana tries to enlighten these people so that, even if they do not convert to our ideal, they may have a wider vision and be more tolerant of other ideals.

Recent national happenings have shown that we are not alone. Lately the monarchist cause has been gaining thousands of new supporters, mainly youths. Unfortunately, until recently there was no type of association which dedicated itself only to them. The few monarchist youth associations that existed were usually confined to schools and universities. Therefore, many young Monarchists agreed with our ideals but were unable to defend themselves against the old republican arguments. That is why, in 1995 four young students decided to form Juventude Lusitana, and although it is true that we are still not widely known, it is also true that we have grown during our first years of life. We are no longer a small "club" we try to establish and maintain contact with many well known Monarchist Associations in and out of Portugal. We are not, and do not pretend to be, sole holders of the truth. We simply believe in the importance of the Monarchy for Portugal and we try to pass the message on to others. We accept criticism and are always ready to argue in favour of our cause.

Monarchy, such as Democracy, is not perfect, we are the first to admit it. But History has proven that it is the best we have. If the Monarchy has flaws, the Republic has many more. We believe that Portugal and it's people would be better served by a Monarchist regime, and this is where our interest lies. Portugal and it's people above all else!

Therefore our motto is "Motherland in the soul, Monarchy in the heart!"

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 01:53 PM

You'd get to meet the Queen.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 01:52 PM

Ha! Sounds like my kind of job.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 01:37 PM

Nothing.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 01:35 PM

Thanks, GUEST,#6(b). I wouldn't dream of ridiculing you. Now can anyone tell me what the Governor General does?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,#6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 01:17 PM

It is full of interesting nuances, Carol, but you are triggering neurons deep in my memory banks, which seem to be have some plaque, or cholesterol, that needs to be shaken off.

Leeder speaks for me in most respects. I don't have the time to write the following eloquently (or sensibly.) In the past fifty years of relative peace, prosperity, and slothfulness, the monarchy has not really been tested. It has lain dormant, largely as a tourist attraction. But, I do enjoy the concept of the monarchy as a back up source of inspiration should the policiticans really, really screw up. Witness King Juan Carlos, Spain, 1981. I perceive Elizabeth II as a woman of strength, dignity and durability. Sure it sounds comical, and of course no one who knows me 3D is aware of this respect for her, but this latent source of power probably exists elsewhere, barely detectable, among my Commonwealth brethren. Again, never forget Juan Carlos. I wish there were a visible viable successor to QE II.

After this true confession, for which I am prepared for ridicule, I should point out that my willingness to be a subject of QE II does not have any application to you Brit tourists and immigrants. (Canada is not a dominion.)

Vive le Quebec libre. Vive le BC libre. Long live the Queen.

(Yes, I'm a bit of a kook: I don't speak for Leeder.)

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:21 PM

Thanks, GUEST,#6(b). But I'm stuck now. I googled it, but I still don't know what "Patriation of the Canadian Constitution" means, and what the implications are of Quebec not signing.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Leeder
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:18 PM

Picking up on random points after a couple of days away...

"Nation" has different meanings in French and English, which has been a source of endless misunderstandings. Quebec is a "nation" in the French sense (which doesn't imply autonymous political sovereignty) but not in the English sense (which does).

The idea that a culture cannot survive unless it has political sovereignty is demonstrably false, witness the fact that the culture of French Canada is thriving more than ever, and is in no danger of being lost, even though Quebec is not a "nation-state" in the English sense.

I'm pro-Quebec, have a bit of French-Canadian ancestry (one great-grandparent), and am proud to be part of a nation which includes the culture of French Canada as well as English-speaking Canada (and which makes room for other cultures without expecting them to assimilate to the mainstream). I don't want to lose the culture of my fellow citizens.

I'm against Quebec politicians who are plotting to dip their fingers into the till by getting control of the federal government's tax revenues, and are working to bring this about by driving wedges between the two cultures. It's all about money, folks. These people are getting ready to rip off their own people, as well as me.

To me, Canadians are "subjects" of the Canadian Crown, which by a quirk of history happens to be worn by the same person who wears the United Kingdom Crown. I have no problem with this situation. There is no formal connection between the Canadian government and the British government, just ties of shared history and compatibility. I'm happy to live in a constitutional monarchy. In theory at least, the supreme figurehead of the country, through whom all power flows, is not a politician. I'd rather have Elizabeth II than Jean Chrétien (or George Bush, or Tony Blair, for that matter) as supreme head of state.

Enough for now...

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:15 PM

*Creeeeeeeeeeeeeep*

Carol, I was half kidding about the Ainu. I think the Japanese have been in most of Japan long enough to be considered 'indigenous' by now. :) As you alluded to, the Ainu are native to Hokkaido, the "Kuriles," and Sakhalin (the latter two currently in Russia, where the Ainus are pretty much extinct). I think there's only about a dozen, mostly elderly, fluent speakers of Ainu today. The rest speak Japanese, unfortunately. :(

I'm not sure about how much control they might have in Hokkaido, but it doesn't really matter much, since they've all given up and gone Japanese.

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:07 PM

Ok. From the little bit of research I've just done in Google, it looks like the bulk of the landmass of Japan is still occupied and controlled by it's indiginous population. The northern islands being the exception. Someone correct me, please, if I'm wrong.

Sorry for the thread creep.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 11:23 AM

Lepus Rex, did the Ainu ever inhabit all of the islands? My understanding is that they only inhabited islands in the north. Are they no longer there? Are the rest of the Islands not under the control of their original inhabitants? If the Ainu are still there, are they not a part of the governance of Japan? Did they ever have any dispute over how Japan is governed, or are they as much in control of the Country as the other ethnic populations?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,#6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 11:00 AM

Correction: RichM's requests for civility were important, and in fact, I am astounded that anyone could deem a national constitution unimportant. Justice, even lives, depend on such subjects.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,#6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:55 AM

Nobody said anything here was important, Blackcatter. Just a question of true/false. Got anything important to say?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST,#6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:52 AM

Google it: 1980 Patriation of the Canadian Constitution (Quebec refused to sign)

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Blackcatter
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:49 AM

It is pitiful what people think is important.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: GUEST, #6(b)
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:46 AM

You're absolutely right, Carol. Canada is a consitutional monarchy. Her official title is "Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith." This is her 50th year as our monarch.

Now, there is some deal about Canada having constitutionally converted from having been a dominion of the realm, but that will need to be another installment.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:21 AM

Carol - It's confusing all right! The Queen still appears on the back of every Canadian coin. Perhaps she is considered the "head of state" in some sense, but it's a strictly symbolic one at this point. She has no actual power here.

This is what happens when there is an old existing tradition in the midst of a changing social reality, and it leads to endless and really quite pointless wrangling between people over the most petty matters imaginable.

Example: Suppose someone were to suggest that the queen's face should be removed from all Canadian coins. This would infuriate people who are used to seeing it there, and like to see it there. It would delight people who harbour a grievance against the monarchical tradition. The more vocal among these two lots would hire lawyers, launch legal actions, alert the press, get on the talk shows, and drive everyone nuts with it for years and years. Blows might even be struck over the issue. Vast amounts of time and money would be consumed trying to resolve an unresolvable matter. However the courts and government finally decided it, if they EVER succeeded in doing so...the people on the losing side would feel that a GREAT INJUSTICE had been done, and it would not end there. NO! It would go to appeals, civil disobedience, and more nonsense...on and on and on.

Get the picture? It's pathetic.

This is the kind of silly stuff people waste their energy on, while truly harmful things like poverty, unemployment, environmental damage, etc., are barely dealt with at all in any serious way by the powers who could do something about them.

- LH

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 10:16 AM

Carol, the Ainu might disagree. :)

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: RichM
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 04:05 AM

It's not about dictionary definitions.
It's about how Quebecers think of themselves. Let me clarify my position: I am a Canadian and a Quebecer. I would prefer Quebec to be a part of Canada. I do respect the rights of the majority, though, to decide whether Quebec wants to be a country.

What I particularly dislike is non-quebecers insulting us. If you other Canadians really want to make us feel welcome, you wouldn't insult us or tell us that "you know best how we should feel". Quebecers are just as proud of our French ancestry and culture as any other nationality is-as proud as you are of yours. Making jokes about this is as offensive as telling pickaninny jokes to African Americans.
As for our American mudcatters, I'm sure you would understand how a Maine yankee would resent similar advice from Americans outside that state.

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:28 AM

I'm a little confused on the "subject" question.

According to my Cambridge Factfinder (which could very well be wrong), The "Head of State" of Canada is the British monarch, represented by the Governor General. What does this mean? How can the British monarch be Head of State of a country whose citizens are not her/his subjects? Is my CF totaly out of date? (Date of publication, 1993.) Ooohhh, I'm so confused...

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Apr 02 - 12:14 AM

Japan?

Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se
From: Troll
Date: 11 Apr 02 - 11:21 PM

That seems to be the way the world operates and it's done so for many centuries. One culture displaces another and is displaced in its turn. One economic system gives way to another and so it goes.
It isn't just other races that get the shaft. Take a look at the Highland Clearances or the Famine in Ireland.
Actually, the Indians made good customers, trading valuable furs for what the Europeans considered trinkets but the land became more valuable than the fur so off we go to Oklahoma!
I can't think of any places where the aboriginal inhabitants are living on their ancestral land and have full control of it.

troll