|
09 Apr 02 - 10:11 AM (#686122) Subject: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,Geordie The bloc quebecois voted against a motion to send condolences and sympathy to the Royal Family. This they do because they want to Be "Canadians" I really am sick to death of the pettiness of some politicians in this country. The Bloc has denied being Canadian for years..now they are suddenly consum,ed with national Pride. Spae me. As for Svend Robinson.......what a boob. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 10:14 AM (#686126) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: MMario According to the news reports over 50 contries are represented at the funeral services - I would think it only polite to send condolences - whether Canadian, Brazilian, or Martian. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 12:36 PM (#686265) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: sophocleese I thought Chretien, the Prime Minister of Canada was going to be there or send word. Apparently a racetrack owner from Toronto area was also invited to the funeral. So I think some parts of Canada will be represented. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 12:49 PM (#686279) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST Yea; Ontario |
|
09 Apr 02 - 01:02 PM (#686290) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM The government proposal was worded as "subjects of the queen" rather than "citizens of Canada"...
That's what the Bloc objected to. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 01:05 PM (#686294) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST Semantics.. they also lay claim to most of Labrador and the Cree lands in the north. When told they would have to consider seperation from Canada with pre Confederation borders they pouted and said "not fair" bunch of fuckwits. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 01:06 PM (#686295) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM For those interested in what this is about,click here! |
|
09 Apr 02 - 01:15 PM (#686303) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,Geordie My point was that they seem only to want to be called "Canadian" when it suits them. For years they have denied being Canadian now they want the motion to say Canadian..I don't understand these petty people at all. What is it they want..they never objected to being Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. That is all I was trying to say. Surely the nation can send condolences without these self absorbed Bloc heads objecting. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 01:36 PM (#686334) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu Ya knoooow, much as I "dislike" some of the the PQ policies, it was not necessary to use "subjects" in place of "citizens". I believe the wording was intended to stir up shit and also that those who chose the wording are as much to blame as the PQ for the esuing shitstorm. I mean really, even the Brits didn't use the term "subjects" in their letter of condolence from Parliament. BTW, there was never any doubt that Jean would be there. |
|
09 Apr 02 - 05:46 PM (#686545) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Dead Horse I suggest you guys throw all the *French* out of Canada, and send 'em all down south. Then, in about 100 years or so, we can all enjoy a great new sound & dance style, and a fabulous mode of cookery etc. Rejoice that you have an ethnic diversity, and are not slavishly devoted to "The Mother Country". Of course, when some froggie big-wig kicks the bucket, you can always get even by having a party in the streets of Ontario...... |
|
09 Apr 02 - 06:46 PM (#686581) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,CraigS It is not a generally known fact that Great Britain does not legally have an official language; that the official language is therefore that of the English Court; and that the language of the English Court is French. When Her Majesty the Queen visits Canada she speaks French, and has been filmed doing so with Pierre Trudeau and others. Considering that her lineage can be traced back to French royalty, The Quebecois and their monarch DO have something in common! I am not a monarchist, but I do think the French Canadians do seem to be going a long way to alienate their friends in a world where patriotic nationalism seems to be a logical step on the way to war, considering that they were sold out by one of a historically long succession of French governments. |
|
10 Apr 02 - 07:18 PM (#687444) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Peter K (Fionn) RichM, thanks for that link - very helpful to people like me who know little about politics within Canada and Quebec. I agree totally with whoever said above that the language was needlessly offensive to the Quebecois. Indeed it seems to have been calculated to provoke confrontation. No need to have mentioned any god, and no need to have mentioned "subjects" - which causes deep ofence to many of us in the UK too. In this specific instance, I'm glad the Quebecois bloc didn't just roll over. |
|
10 Apr 02 - 11:38 PM (#687609) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder Fact is, though, the BQ are looking for excuses to disagree with the rest of the country. If it wasn't the word "subject", it'd have been something else. I disagree that they want to "be Canadian", except in the very old sense, when Canada was just Quebec. They want the rest of Canada to just go away. It's very anomalous that we have a political party in our federal government devoted to breaking up the country. Elsewhere in the world, it'd be treasonous. Maybe the fact that it happens here is one of our strengths, or maybe our tolerance is a weakness that'll lead to our downfall. However, I fear for the country less than I did a few years ago, as the BQ seem to have become more petty and marginalized. Case in point... |
|
10 Apr 02 - 11:42 PM (#687611) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: pict I don't think the Windsors will lose any sleep over it. |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:30 AM (#687813) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Mrrzy Hang on - you don't send invitations to a funeral, do you? |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:52 AM (#687818) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM Those who dismiss the Bloc Québecois stance in this matter are unaware that it's a matter of principle. If YOU belonged to a culture that was very aware that it was a conquered people, you might be more sympathetic. Why do I think so? because I am mostly Quebecois in blood, with lesser amounts of Irish, Scot, and Amerindian. Therefore,I think I can speak with authority about this. |
|
11 Apr 02 - 11:55 AM (#687924) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll The question seems to me to be, are Canadians "subjects" of the Queen or not? If they are, then the proposal as stated was correct. If they are not, then "subjects" should never have been used as it is the wrong word. So which is it, Canadians, "subjects" or "citizens"? troll |
|
11 Apr 02 - 12:18 PM (#687944) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk Yawn. Quebec and the rest of Canada will bicker about this sort of thing till the world turns on its side. Well, it's mildly amusing anyway, and at least we're not invading cities and shooting people and blowing things up "real good". I love this country...it's so moderate, eh? :-) - LH |
|
11 Apr 02 - 12:28 PM (#687952) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk Oh. One more thought on this. If the Queen of England had any real power or authority over the lives of Canadians, then I'd be worried about whether or not we were referred to as her "subjects" in some relatively obscure document that will soon be forgotten. The British monarcy has no real authority in the lives of Canadians anymore, so I'm not worried about it. All that remains now are the vestiges of a vanishing tradition. We are subjects of corporate America, not of the British Crown...and that remains true whether anyone says it or not. That's worth worrying about. On that rides the future of our resources, our fresh water, our economic survival, and our cultural survival, whether or not we are French or English or anything else. - LH |
|
11 Apr 02 - 12:32 PM (#687956) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST RichM needs to read history. We were conquered by the bloody Normans in 1066. The only written language was Latin, the only spoken language at the court was French. We dont harbour grudges, and assimilated into the British, United Kingdom, England.... Its easier to keep what you have than reinvent it. Canada has a rich cultural diversity. The PQ need to grow up and join the 21st century and stop being such babies. |
|
11 Apr 02 - 01:45 PM (#687995) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM No, I don't need to read history. I am a genuine descendent of a vibrant Quebecois culture--NOT a *Norman* culture. Quebec is as different from France as the USA is from England. Fish are unaware of water, because they are surrounded by it. Anglo cultures often exhibit the same un-awareness of culture, by taking granted that everyone aspires to be *just like them* In a medium--the internet-- that spans the globe, surely you can see that there are many more cultures-and points of view-than only the anglo variety? |
|
11 Apr 02 - 01:57 PM (#688002) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll Little Hawk is right. You people are milking a mouse. troll |
|
11 Apr 02 - 02:02 PM (#688008) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in BlindRiver Well geez of corse evfeybodyu wants to be like us Anglos, man... We are the best. Face it. We invented just about everyghing worth doing and we run the show. We own all the important brewweries. Also, Don Cherry is from Emnglish Canada, eh? What more do I rweally have to say? BDiBR |
|
11 Apr 02 - 03:26 PM (#688051) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST I went on a visit last year to Kweebeck and had a tabernooshing good time. Most of the people I met were pretty cool, but those whining Kaybeckwaa politicians, tabernoosh. The licence plates in Kweebeck say "Je me souviens." I thought it "I have souvenirs," but it means "Me, I remember." I asked someone what it is they remember and they said they remember that they were conquered by the British in 1759. Tabernoosh, I thought, 1759. Then I noticed that the Kaybeckwaa flag was the fleurs-de-lys, the symbol of the French monarchy. Tabernoosh, I thought, these Kaybeckwaa are still loyal to the king of France. Haven't these people heard, there was a revolution in France in 1789. No, I guess they haven't. And that's why those Kaybeckwaa blockheads insulted that lovely old drunk lady who died last week in London. Now me, I remember this nude lap dancer I met in a strip bar in Montreal. But that's another story. |
|
11 Apr 02 - 03:39 PM (#688070) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: sophocleese Personally I consider myself a "citizen", not a subject, and definitely NOT a consumer. I agree that it was poorly worded which is strange as it could so easily have been written differently. So who really stirred the pot? |
|
11 Apr 02 - 05:35 PM (#688144) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Anyone who thinks Quebec is a nation has no idea of the meaning of the word. FRANCE is a lot more like the United States than it is like Quebec. France, Canada, England and the US are places that have stood up as Nations and have had their citizens die for their Nationhood. Quebec has always been dependant upon others for its security and Welfare. Could Quebec survive as a Nation without the protection of Canada's Alliances Armies and Tariffs. Maybe, but her people would not accept the drop in living standards. Distinct culture, maybe, but what is that, a few comedians, a few singers who cares? Quebec has never had the courage to be a nation. She probably never will. BTW The condolences should have read "the people of Canada" |
|
11 Apr 02 - 06:53 PM (#688189) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM Quite an insult, Jack the Sailor. And citizens of Quebec have gone to war--for Canada. Among them my father. My two uncles. Have you faced enemy bullets, like they did? |
|
11 Apr 02 - 07:43 PM (#688205) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,Jean Chrétien In his ignorance, RichM refers to "citizens of Quebec." There is no such thing as *Quebec* citizenship, only **Canadian** citizenship. |
|
11 Apr 02 - 08:10 PM (#688221) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Jeri In his ignorance, Mr Cretien doesn't look at a dictionary and misses the the fact that "citizen" means "inhabitant." Maybe the dictionaries in Quebec are different than the ones elsewhere, or maybe Quebec isn't really a place, only a state of mind... |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:29 PM (#688270) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk Now don't underestimate Jean Chretien's ignorance, please! A little respect would be in order. Let's let Jean speak for himself... Don' lec-ture me about 'oo is a citiZEN of Ca-na-DA! I wrote da book on dat, because I am da little guy from Shawinigan and I have da comMON touch. I speak straight from da HEART! An' if you don' like what I got to say, den you better jus' watch yourself, budDY, cause I am da Prime MiniSTER of dis countRY, an' I got a Loooong Arm! Two of dem, in fact! An' I will jus' grab you aroun' de t'roat an' teach you a 'ting or two if you get in my way! An den my mounties will teach you a 'ting or t'ree, mister! An' we got pepper SPRAY to spare if dat don' shut you up! - LH |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:39 PM (#688273) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll Again I will ask my question which is, as yet, unanswered. Are the people of Canada subjects of the British Crown? A simple "yes" or "no" will sufice. troll |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:47 PM (#688276) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk troll - No, they are not. To say they are is to echo a rather archaic tradition. Canada has been a legally independent country for quite a long time now. As I said, they are subjects of corporate America, but that's not necessarily official, you understand. - LH |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:53 PM (#688281) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll Thank you Little Hawk. The proclaimation should have read people or citizens. End of song. End of story. troll |
|
11 Apr 02 - 09:57 PM (#688283) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll BTW, LH. "Subjects" has such...ah...undemocratic overtones. We prefer "customers". Much nicer word, don't you think? troll |
|
11 Apr 02 - 10:29 PM (#688308) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk Ha! Yeah, "customers" does sound more democratic, doesn't it? Why throttle the canary brutally with your bare hands, when you can smother it gently with a nice soft overstuffed feather pillow from K-Mart? The American Indians made lousy customers. That's why it was considered more expedient at the time to relocate them or simply wipe them out. - LH |
|
11 Apr 02 - 11:21 PM (#688325) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Troll 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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:14 AM (#688339) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Japan? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:28 AM (#688343) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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... |
|
12 Apr 02 - 04:05 AM (#688383) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: RichM 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:16 AM (#688498) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Lepus Rex Carol, the Ainu might disagree. :) ---Lepus Rex |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:21 AM (#688504) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk 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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:46 AM (#688519) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST, #6(b) 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:49 AM (#688522) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Blackcatter It is pitiful what people think is important. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:52 AM (#688526) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,#6(b) Google it: 1980 Patriation of the Canadian Constitution (Quebec refused to sign) |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:55 AM (#688527) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,#6(b) Nobody said anything here was important, Blackcatter. Just a question of true/false. Got anything important to say? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 11:00 AM (#688530) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,#6(b) 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 11:23 AM (#688552) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:07 PM (#688590) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:15 PM (#688598) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Lepus Rex *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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:18 PM (#688600) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder 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... |
|
12 Apr 02 - 12:21 PM (#688602) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 01:17 PM (#688640) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,#6(b) 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.) |
|
12 Apr 02 - 01:35 PM (#688654) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Thanks, GUEST,#6(b). I wouldn't dream of ridiculing you. Now can anyone tell me what the Governor General does? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 01:37 PM (#688658) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,6(b) Nothing. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 01:52 PM (#688670) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Ha! Sounds like my kind of job. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 01:53 PM (#688672) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST You'd get to meet the Queen. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 02:26 PM (#688685) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST 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!" |
|
12 Apr 02 - 03:04 PM (#688698) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk 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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 04:08 PM (#688742) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Hey LH... Don Cherry the hocky, or Don Cherry the jazz? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 04:13 PM (#688745) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Don Cherry the hockey |
|
12 Apr 02 - 06:06 PM (#688795) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 06:21 PM (#688798) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk 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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 06:40 PM (#688813) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu Coach's Corner is the best part of HNIC ! |
|
12 Apr 02 - 07:03 PM (#688835) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Don Cherry's dog, Blue (scroll down a little bit) Also... Dwayne's Homepage |
|
12 Apr 02 - 07:24 PM (#688846) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Blackcatter 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 |
|
12 Apr 02 - 07:35 PM (#688858) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu Great JC CC ! Ye's a true hoser, bar none maid ! Now, what's Dwayne's last name ? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 07:41 PM (#688864) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC (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). |
|
12 Apr 02 - 08:19 PM (#688883) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu 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. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 08:22 PM (#688885) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: gnu ... Christianity |
|
12 Apr 02 - 08:44 PM (#688896) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull JC=John Cleese. |
|
12 Apr 02 - 09:13 PM (#688905) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC Not Jimminy Cricket then? |
|
12 Apr 02 - 10:17 PM (#688927) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST,#6(b) Sorry for going off Blackcatter. (But clear you weren't.) |
|
12 Apr 02 - 11:42 PM (#688950) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk I love it when threads like this one go totally adrift and still manage to get in some Canadian content... :-) - LH |
|
15 Apr 02 - 10:25 PM (#690921) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder 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? |
|
15 Apr 02 - 11:01 PM (#690944) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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? |
|
15 Apr 02 - 11:45 PM (#690962) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder 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. |
|
16 Apr 02 - 01:09 AM (#691001) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk 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 |
|
16 Apr 02 - 10:00 AM (#691250) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Mike Regenstreif 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 |
|
16 Apr 02 - 10:47 AM (#691277) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST 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. |
|
16 Apr 02 - 12:14 PM (#691322) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: CarolC 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. |
|
16 Apr 02 - 02:50 PM (#691374) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder 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). |
|
16 Apr 02 - 05:52 PM (#691506) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Little Hawk 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 |
|
18 Apr 02 - 11:44 AM (#692898) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: Leeder By coincidence, yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the repatriation. |
|
19 Apr 02 - 09:05 AM (#693655) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: GUEST "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user." Theodore Roosevelt
|
|
19 Apr 02 - 10:33 AM (#693725) Subject: RE: Bloc quebecois votes gainst motion to se From: sian, west wales 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) |