Monday, November 13, 2006

If acknowledging Quebec as a nation is not the answer, what is the alternative? (Update)

Yesterday I asked the following questions regarding the Quebec Nation resolution.

What would you propose as an alternative to it?

How would you propose Liberals deal with the changes to our Federation?

What would you propose as an alternative to the proposals put forward by the Conservatives and the Separatists?

In asking the questions I was using that old lawyer trick of knowing the answer to them before asking.

Liberals still have not come to grips with the inevitability of change that came about as a result of the near miss of the 1995 referendum. They are still fixated by those oncoming headlights.

The Conservatives have come to grips with it and they have been using that near miss as a spring board to realize their goal of dismantling the federal government, dismantling its unifying influence in the process. Judging by the news reports from last week they are moving forward with that and I imagine that the Bloc and Mr. Charest will be quite happy to facilitate it when the time comes.

Although it is not perfect and it is fraught with risks the Quebec Nation resolution provides an alternative. It is not going away and although it needs to be amended Liberals should accept it and acknowledge what Quebecers already believe to be true.

Reject it and Liberals can kiss Quebec goodbye for at least another two elections and they get to watch helplessly as Mr. Harper, ably assisted by Mr. Duceppe, Mr. Charest, Mr. Klein's successor, Mr. Williams and Mr. Campbell, dismantle the Canadian federation.

Oh yes, as an aside, I completely reject the notion that other groups will scream to be recognized as nations if this resolution passes. Such slippery slope arguments are rarely valid and I find it hilarious that Liberals are using it when they have condemned the Conservatives for using it in the SSM debate. You know, if we let gays marry, then it is only a matter of time before polygamy, bestiality and all sorts of other unnatural unions are legal.

The assertion by some Liberals that acknowledging Quebec is a nation will lead to demands by such places as Toronto to be declared a nation is a preposterous as the Conservative assertion that SSM opens the door to legalizing pedophilia.

5 Comments:

Blogger propatria said...

It should be HEAVILY HEAVILY amended, as in making sure nation is recognized by all as meaning "a people", not a territory. Under no circumstances should federalists buy into that separatist clap trap notion of the "quebec people" (as in the former subjects of the french crown in canada , french-canadians, quebecois, whatever) having a specific territory which belongs to them called quebec. The territory they belong to is called canada. Quebec is a province of canada. It is not, nor has it ever been a nation. The idea that the province of quebec is the direct descendant of new france is separatist hogwash. Canada is that direct descendant.

November 13, 2006 2:15 PM  
Blogger WestmountLiberal said...

To answer your question - no "alternative" is required.

November 13, 2006 3:37 PM  
Blogger s.b. said...

Simple, believe in the right to self determination for women, people, peoples, nations, states, etc. It is more like argueing on blogs whether or not Bob Rae is Jewish. Simple, he is if he says he is. Does that change his legal status as a person, man candidate, Canadian? No. Should it? NO. Should it be discussed in the context of the constitution that Bob Rae as a Jew be given special status or distinct status or religious status in Canada. Nope. Does anyone need to be bringing it up as an arguement in this race? Nope.

Self determination is just that. Quebequois French Canadians can think they are a nation. Thay can have a National Assembly, a national library and a national archives, which they do. Do we need to debate or discuss how some quebec residents view themselves? No. Does that give them special staus in Canada? No!!

You see its very simple. I can call myself Miss, Ms., Dr. or Mrs, whichever I self determine. I can't change my rights under the constitution, no matter what I call myself.

November 13, 2006 6:40 PM  
Blogger Maximilien said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

November 13, 2006 6:46 PM  
Blogger Maximilien said...

he alternative at the word "nation" could be "national community"
Council of Europe tried to defined nation for all european countries from 2003 to 2005. Conclusion : impossible cause the meaning of the word "nation" is too much different in France, Germany or UK (there is a report on that).

For now, this is a nice video ;-)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT3wc27ex4I

November 13, 2006 6:48 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home