What Does 'nation' Mean, Mr. Harper?

It is not just the term "nation" that Harper has not defined but also Quebecois (is there any way here to add French language accents?). Like Paul Martin, Harper tends to talk too much because he went on to say that the term Quebecois should be defined by the Quebec legislature. This means that Harper is using the term to refer to a definite geo-political region not just a cultural group.

A separatist government would be able to define a nation as a state. One of the definitions in my Dictionnaire de la Langue Francaise does define nation in the terms of a state so the French language allows for such a definition even if some people in Quebec might not interpret it as such.

It is no wonder that the PQ and now the BQ are eager to embrace the concept. The separatists see this as an important step towards separation.

P.M. Harper and the ruling Conservative Government of Canada by officially recognizing Quebec as a "nation" within Canada or a cultural group of people as a nation within Canada in Parliament has now given this group official legal status.

This now allows for the next step of juridical conformation and the enforcing of all the rights and privileges that go with it. Unless Harper and the Conservative party of Canada want to now say it was just a figure of speech?

The worm has now turned but maybe that is the goal or turning point that the Harper Conservatives have been looking for. We all know that the United States of America and George Bush doesn’t want bilingualism. You could not have Canada being brought into the Union having a cultural group wanting independence that would open a Pandora’s Box of problems with the Spanish speaking Americans.

I put to you just maybe; just maybe this is the first major step in a planed agenda to allow Canada to become part of the United States of America.


---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

"nation" and "nation state" are not the same thing. Just ask the First Nations peoples. The inability of Anglo-Canadians to understand this difference has cost Canada a lot. Had the Quebecois been recognized as a nation within the federation 40 years ago there would not have been so much of a hassel over the question of whether Quebec wants to separate or not. The fact is, both Quebec and the ROC face a common enemy - US imperialism - and a common internal enemy, the Quisling/comprador element. Even if Quebec were to become "independent" it would still have to be in close relations with the ROC - say in an EU fashion to protect itself as much as possible from the Gringos who would eat an isolated independent Quebec for lunch, after they breakfasted on an isolated independent ROC. In reality folks there is no such critter as "independence" anyway...

'In reality folks there is no such critter as
"independence" anyway...'

Of course independence exists - in the many fairy tales
spun by U.S. History Books. Like our buddies to the
South, Ottawa is trying to use this fictitious concept to
their utmost benefit.

Quebecers have come to understand and define themselves as a nation, with a language, history, culture and territory that marks them out as a separate people as Jews see themselves and the justification for the creation of the State of Israel. This is not the same meaning as used with treaty Indians of North America. You may argue or be more passively tolerating that this is mostly semantics and no big deal.

I feel that Quebecers won’t be so inclined to figments of someone’s imagination, words or statements without substance or even some symbolic acceptance of the status quo. Quebecers won’t stop for anything less then what the self-determination of nationhood, or the idea that peoples or nations have the right to a sovereign state especially now the Government of Canada including the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party of Canada now has recognized them as a nation separate and unto themselves.

This is just one small step toward nationhood and one giant step for recognition of the French Canadian language, history, culture and territory in Canada and North America.


---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.

Are Newfoundlanders (including Labradorians) a nation within a united Canada?
Are Prince Edward Islanders a nation within a united Canada?
Are New Brunswickers a nation within a united Canada?
Are Nova Scotians (including Cape Bretoners) a nation within a united Canada?
Are Ontarians a nation within a united Canada?
Are Manitobans a nation within a united Canada?
Are Saskatchewaners a nation within a united Canada?
Are Albertans a nation within a united Canada?
Are British Columbians a nation within a united Canada?
Are the "Territorians" (a.k.a. as Yukoners, NWTians and Nunavuters) nations within a united Canada?

IF the answer to any of these is "yes", the answer about Quebecers should not be that difficult.

But IF the answer to any of these is "no", we are back to the two solitudes - a notion with is unacceptable to many.

Just asking.

Sounds like Meech Lake all over again? Why not a public stoning of Stephen Harper and make it different this time around? Just asking.

---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"