[Perturbed]

[QUOTE BY= lesouris] Hello, I was just pondering a few things so I thought I'd ask these questions to all separatists in Canada whether they be in Québec, the West, or anywhere else. I guess the whole point of this thread is that I want to know how separatists feel justified in their claims that Canada is so horrible to them. So here are the questions: <br /> <br />GENERAL QUESTIONS <br />1. How do you compare yourself to separatists in other countries (i.e. Northern Ireland, Kosovo, Tibet, et cetera) when their struggles for independence have been based on years of persecution and unfair treatment far worse than your own (including torutre, ethnic clensing, internment without trial, et cetera)? <br />2. When is separatism a justifiable solution? <br />3. What exactly are you trying to solve by separating? <br />4. Do you understand that you do have a strong provincial government, something other separatist groups would (and have) killed for? <br /> <br />QUEBEC-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS <br />1. If I understand the arguements for Québec separation, the invasion of New France is one of your more nationalistic points, but do you relize that the French themselves were also invaders? Surely, if anyone has the right to feel separatist it is the Aboriginals that actually have valid reasons to leave (i.e. lower standard of living). <br />2. How is language a justification for separation? <br />3. Where do you draw the line between nationalism and jingoism? <br /> <br />WESTERN-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS <br />1. How do Western Separatists justify separation based soley on selfish, American-like economic reasons? <br />2. How would a separate West survive after all of the oil is gone? <br /> <br />FINAL QUESTION <br />Would you, as a separatist, ever change your mind about separation? If not, aren't you being just a bit stubborn? <br /> <br />FINAL THOUGHTS <br />If separation is ever achieved anywhere in Canada, there would probably still remain a large faction of people who want to rejoin confederation. What if a majority of people in this new country decide to rejoin Canada? <br /> <br />PS. I would support separatism if the people of a region were oppressed ruthlessly. I do support separatism for this reason in Northern Ireland, Kosovo, Tibet, the Basqueland, and Palestine. I do not see how any people in Canada (except perhaps Aboriginal groups) could claim that they are still being treated as horribly as any of these people.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Like Rick Mercer said. If Quebec separated, Canada would change its name to Quebec, and Quebec would vote to rejoin Quebec, and then Quebec would change its name back to Canada <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'>

[Dino]

Lesouris first of all if you consider the west manitoba, saskatchewan, alberta and b.c. no one is advocating seperatism. If you ever here of western alienation it's only the people in Alberta. Not Saskatchewan Manitoba or B.C..B.C. is further west the Alberta is for Ottawa and you don't hear people in vancouver whining about western alienation. <br /> <br />No province can seperate from Canada except for Quebec because the rest joined the Canadian constitution in 1982. <br /> <br />If you look at the USA with mostly it being red states and a few blue ones, the blue ones are not suggesting seperation because they willfully joined a constitution and constitution is regarded as a legal document that you can't back out of. <br /> <br />I wrote what I'm about to say on another thread but i'm saying it again <br />I think there is only one way to settle the talk of seperation. When the parti quebecois is in power in Quebec they can call a referendum to break up the country. So far no luck. I think that the federal government should now have it's turn. In 1980 the federalist side won but the talk of breaking up the country continued. In 1995 the same thing. <br /> <br />Now there is a federalist in power. The federal government should propose changing the constitution with the approval of the rest of Canada and then have the Liberals in Quebec to call a referendum. If 50.1% of quebecers support entering the constitution then Quebec is a part of Canada forever and Gilles Duceppe's dreams of Quebec being a country are over. If the Liberals lose then they can always try again while there is still a federalist in office in Quebec. <br /> <br />That is what the federal government should be focusing on. <br /> <br />If this were to happen Gille Duceppe,Bouchard,Landry would get to see what it felt like for the rest of Canada when Canada was on the brink of breaking up. All seperatists in Quebec would be working really hard to prevent a majority from supporting entering the constitution. <br /> <br />Because if you give quebecers a choice that if they choose not to sign the constitution because they want there own country then the federal governemnt needs to tell them they won't have anymore ties with Canada, no passport, no money from all the oil that comes up from the rest of Canada, not being able to use Canadian currency and so forth. <br />And I believe the majority of Quebecers would support to remain inside Canada! <br /> <br />

[Guest]

LESOURIS <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]QUEBEC-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS <br />1. If I understand the arguements for Québec separation, the invasion of New France is one of your more nationalistic points, but do you relize that the French themselves were also invaders?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />So, do you mean it is correct for anglo-saxons to invade? French in new France were not invaders. They were living peacefully with the Indians long before the anglos arrived. The French and Indians signed <b><u>THE GREAT PEACE OF MONTREAL </u></b>in 1702. James Wolfe wasn't even born then. Listen. We were disrupted on our own land, conquered and annexed. What we want now is to "undo" the Conquest, plain and simple. The planet doesn't stop spinning after the Conquest. What was done can be undone. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Surely, if anyone has the right to feel separatist it is the Aboriginals that actually have valid reasons to leave (i.e. lower standard of living).[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I will repeat what I said a number of times : Quebec does what it has to do regardless of what others do or don't do for themselves. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]2. How is language a justification for separation? <br />3. Where do you draw the line between nationalism and jingoism?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Read the long thread on What Canada thinks of Quebec. Everything has been addressed. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Would you, as a separatist, ever change your mind about separation? If not, aren't you being just a bit stubborn?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />If Meech had passed, I, for one, would have been very happy. I can't speak for Quebec as a whole, but I believe a strong majority of Quebeckers would have accepted it. Canada screwed it and it's too late now. <br />No agreements can be reached. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]If separation is ever achieved anywhere in Canada, there would probably still remain a large faction of people who want to rejoin confederation. What if a majority of people in this new country decide to rejoin Canada?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Based on new countries that were formed since WW2, <b>NO ONE </b>ever wanted to go back to what they were before. We assume it is an indication for Quebec's particular situation. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I do not see how any people in Canada (except perhaps Aboriginal groups) could claim that they are still being treated as horribly as any of these people.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />We want to be sovereign because we want to exist as a people, we want to make our own decisions with our money. We are not happy with another nation taking money into our pockets, creating wealth elsewhere and returning us a big welfare cheque. We don't want to be perpetual welfare recipients. We have ingeniosity, initiative, bright people, we are survivors and we are tenacious. Sovereignty is just a milestone for us. <br /> <br />We don't want our language to disappear and we don't want our weight to drop inside Canada to insignificant proportions. We want to keep our immigration and we want to function in French as a society. Any more questions? <br /> <br />

[lesouris]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />We want to be sovereign because we want to exist as a people, we want to make our own decisions with our money. We are not happy with another nation taking money into our pockets, creating wealth elsewhere and returning us a big welfare cheque. We don't want to be perpetual welfare recipients. We have ingeniosity, initiative, bright people, we are survivors and we are tenacious. Sovereignty is just a milestone for us. <br /> <br />We don't want our language to disappear and we don't want our weight to drop inside Canada to insignificant proportions. We want to keep our immigration and we want to function in French as a society. Any more questions? <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I don't see how Quebec differs from the ROC in any of these matters. We share common goals. Every province wants to be self-sufficient. Every province has its own society, its own dynamic that makes it work. <br /> <br />As for your observation that no country that has separated since WWII has wanted to join back with the country it used to belong to, you have to look at the number of peoples who supported independence in the first place. <br /> <br />In countries where 75% + of the population wanted independence, well no, you will not see anyone campaigning to get back into their old countries. Take East Timor, I think at least 90% of the population voted for separation, and the other 10% fled. Quebec separation will never be endorsed by 90% of the population, you'd be lucky to get 55%. <br /> <br />Let's just face the facts here, Canada is catching up to Quebec on the Quiet Revolution; our values our begining to converge. Quebec is de facto a distinct society, and we all recognize that. I mean, separatism might've been stirred up again by the sponsorship scandal, but hey, that's going to blow over. <br /> <br />Sure, there are some hardline Quebec separatists, but they'll become more and more of a minority. The BQ will become a party for Quebec interests, not Quebec separatism; the old provincial party lines in Quebec will be dissolved by the UFP and ADQ. I predict that Quebec separatism will become as obsolete as Welsh separatism is in the UK now (there are some hardline separatists there, but the old separatist party, Plaid Cymru, is now only a party of Welsh promotion, not separation).

[Macdonald/Borden]

Me relatives in Ulster laugh at you Quebec seperatists everytime I talk to them on the phone and tell them about what Gilli, Benny, the Bloquistes and the Pequistes are doing and saying! You're nothing but a joke to the cause! <br /> <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/lol.gif' alt='Laughing Out Loud'> <br /> <br />They can not believe that a province which has faced no discrimination, has some of the highest living standards in the world and has a protected language and culture wants to seperate, even though they've never been an actual country. <br /> <br />- But again I should never stereotype, thats what idiots do! Most Quebeckers don't want to seperate, so the world isn't laughing at Quebec, just you guys.

[Guest]

McDonald : <br /> <br /> [QUOTE]Me relatives in Ulster laugh at you Quebec seperatists everytime I talk to them on the phone and tell them about what Gilli, Benny, the Bloquistes and the Pequistes are doing and saying! You're nothing but a joke to the cause! <br /> <br />They can not believe that a province which has faced no discrimination, has some of the highest living standards in the world and has a protected language and culture wants to seperate, even though they've never been an actual country. <br /> <br />- But again I should never stereotype, thats what idiots do! Most Quebeckers don't want to seperate, so the world isn't laughing at Quebec, just you guys. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />You may be more useful on another thread, because on this one, your participation is tantamount to nil. You have no knowledge of Quebec, of what our precarious situation is, of what we went through. Even when we try to explain, you don`t listen. <br /> <br />So keep talking with your relatives in Ulster over the phone. Maybe you`ll come up with a solution for Canada! <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />

[Guest]

Lesouris <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I don't see how Quebec differs from the ROC in any of these matters. We share common goals. Every province wants to be self-sufficient. Every province has its own society, its own dynamic that makes it work.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Well, you asked a question and I answered. Whether you agree or not with what I said, is not going to change our side of the story. I am not going to convince you and you are not going to convince me. <br /> <br />True, we have things in common. But we have more things that are different. The main communication tool, language, is different. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]As for your observation that no country that has separated since WWII has wanted to join back with the country it used to belong to, you have to look at the number of peoples who supported independence in the first place.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I don`t have the exact numbers on this. Do you? <br /> <br />[QUOTE]In countries where 75% + of the population wanted independence, well no, you will not see anyone campaigning to get back into their old countries. Take East Timor, I think at least 90% of the population voted for separation, and the other 10% fled. Quebec separation will never be endorsed by 90% of the population, you'd be lucky to get 55%.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Quebec plays by the 50+1 democracy rules. So does Canada, and it is in Canada`s interests to do so. My predictions is that we`ll get over 60%. Now, if some people flee, we can`t keep them against their will. Others will come that will be more sympathetic to us. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Let's just face the facts here, Canada is catching up to Quebec on the Quiet Revolution; our values our begining to converge. Quebec is de facto a distinct society, and we all recognize that. I mean, separatism might've been stirred up again by the sponsorship scandal, but hey, that's going to blow over.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />If you mean that Quebec is carrying Canada like a millstone around its neck, that is another reason for sovereignty! Quebec is not recognized as a nation and will never be. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Sure, there are some hardline Quebec separatists, but they'll become more and more of a minority. The BQ will become a party for Quebec interests, not Quebec separatism; the old provincial party lines in Quebec will be dissolved by the UFP and ADQ. I predict that Quebec separatism will become as obsolete as Welsh separatism is in the UK now (there are some hardline separatists there, but the old separatist party, Plaid Cymru, is now only a party of Welsh promotion, not separation.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I think just the opposite will happen. What I find from the ROC is that they refuse to consider the possibility of a yes victory. Just like in 1995, the federalist side started to panic as the yes side gained momentum. <br /> <br />The same thing is going to happen again on the next referendum. Nothing has been done since 1995 to meet Quebec`s traditional demands. On the contrary, it was the worst episode of Quebec-bashing in Canadian history. <br /> <br />It won`t be pretty to watch the feds panic on the next referendum. "Love rallyes", empty and hypocritical promises, emotional and patriotic speeches and how we are "loved, needed, distinct, the heart of Canada", etc. will abound. The same simplistic and imbecile strategies used over and over again will lose their punch. People won`t buy it. <br /> <br />Maybe the old parties will evolve, but the sovereingtist affiliation will remain : PQ, ADQ, UFP, OC, Greens, etc, whereas Patapouf's PLQ will decline. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />

[Marcarc]

GENERAL QUESTIONS <br />1. How do you compare yourselves to other imperialists-Great Britain, China, etc. How do you relate non-violent techniques used in Canada (making it impossible for french people to get a job anywhere else in the country, disallowing implementation of provincially designed trade agreements, fishing rights, etc.) <br />2.When is imperialism justified? <br />3. What would be solved by 'denying' separation if it's voted for by a majority of Quebecers? <br />4. Do you understand that the federal government is stronger and frequently overrides provincial jurisdiction? <br /> <br />QUEBEC CENTRED QUESTIONS <br />1. Living in the ancient past is irrelevant to the problems at hand. All those people involved are now long deceased. The problems exist NOW. No separatist wants separation because their ancestors lost a battle long ago. Separation is desired because of the political relationship which now exists. The treatment of natives is proof positive that canada has no respect for even the basics of human rights. While quebec as a province is 'better off' than native bands, the two are separate issues. Natives, of course, are also struggling for self government but since they lack the financial and political resources available in Quebec their demands are ignored except in very rare cases. <br />2. Anybody who thinks the only difference between Quebec and the ROC is language clearly doesn't know anything about the Quebec culture. <br />3. There is no 'line' between nationalism and jingoism, they are two completely different words. <br /> <br />WESTERN CENTRIC QUESTIONS <br />1. All seperatist ideologies are based on 'self-ish' reasons, as are all imperialist ideologies. It is the desire to be free of external constraints that drives all rebellious natures. 'American style' simply implies, well, who knows what that implies. <br />2 . After the oil is gone, the west will be in far better shape than the rest of canada which has no oil. Newfoundland only has twenty years worth of oil. The more pertinent question is how would the rest of canada survive if the west separated. This explains the 'selfish' reasons of other canadians. <br /> <br />FINAL THOUGHTS <br /> Would you consider changing your mind about separation, if not, aren't YOU being stubborn? <br /> <br />PS Of course since you are not a Quebecer you are in no position to judge. Just like the English were in no position to judge whether it would be right for India to stop being a colony. Empires are held by force and are broken, usually (and unfortunately) by force. <br /> <br />

[Marcarc]

That message was pretty long so thought I'd conclude on a separate one. That message doesn't come from a Quebec separatist, or western separatist, but from an EASTERN separist. In New Brunswick our ancestors voted NO in a referendum to join Nova Scotia, Quebec and Ontario. This was rejected two years later in 1867 when the governing party maintained that part of its elected mandate was interprovincial treaties-which it was not, under British law. <br /> However, it is not that simple. There is the 'hypothetical canada' which could exist, such as if elected representatives actually represented canadians. As it is, government is 'the shadow cast by business over society'. However, as it is now, there is little about canadian government I see as redeeming. Any positive features of canadian government, such as the potential power of canadians if they ever act would exist in any separate nation. <br /> As has been stated elsewhere, slaves in the 1850's had a higher standard of living than in the 1750's but that isn't an argument to favour slavery.

[lesouris]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />If you mean that Quebec is carrying Canada like a millstone around its neck, that is another reason for sovereignty! Quebec is not recognized as a nation and will never be. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />That arguement can be used for every region in Canada, we all carry Canada, because that is what Canada is: a mosaic of regions each contributing their own ideas creating a unique society of societies. A nation of nations. Quebec has contributed a lot to Canada's mosaic, so have English Canadians, Scots, Irish, the First Nations, Inuit, et cetera, maybe not to the same degree, but they're all just as valid. Nation is an ambiguous term...a nation can be a country, a culture, or an ethnicity. <br /> <br />Growing up and living in Toronto, I have learned to respect a multicultural, multi-linguistic community. If these communities can all get along here, I find it hard to belive a multicultural nation cannot stay together harmoniously. Maybe this is why the heart of Quebec federalism is Montreal, the most ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse city in Quebec. Maybe that's why I can't comprehend why a culture should constitute a separate country. I do acknowledge that Quebec is more than just a culture, I personally recognize Quebec as a distinct society and nation (in the ethno-cultural and historic sense). But when we're given culture as the main reason for separation, than I have to wonder, why not Chinatown? Why not Little Italy? Why not Danforth (the Greek area)? <br /> <br />So I have to assume Quebec sovereigntists are anti-multicultural...afterall, the Eastern Townships have been "Linguistically Clensed" as it were. French-speaking people in Ontario have as much right as English-speaking people to use their language, especially in areas where they make up a majority. The PQ goovernment of Quebec made it impossible for English-speaking people to use the English language in English-speaking areas in communication with the government and governing institutions. For this reason, elderly people in the Eastern Townships that exclusively speak English are not even given the right to use their language in a hospital...that can be a life or death situation for an elderly person. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I think just the opposite will happen. What I find from the ROC is that they refuse to consider the possibility of a yes victory. Just like in 1995, the federalist side started to panic as the yes side gained momentum.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />That's what Welsh separatists also say, yet Wales will probably never separate from the UK. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]The same thing is going to happen again on the next referendum. Nothing has been done since 1995 to meet Quebec`s traditional demands. On the contrary, it was the worst episode of Quebec-bashing in Canadian history. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Considering this has probably the worst time in Canadian history for the bashing of any province. I mean, every province is made fun of by those in other provinces...and you have to also consider that most of the "Quebec-bashers" you speak of are actually separatist bashers, many from Quebec itself. If anyone has reason to separate because of province-bashing its Newfoundland and Labrador. <br /> <br />I suspect many of us are bitter because Quebec was almost lost. It's kind of like when you find out your spouse has been cheating on you (and I don't blame Quebec at all for that, I mean, if I was married to Canada and it was as abusive to me as it has been to Quebec, I would cheat too). It's like Canada used to be an abusive spouce who went to rehab and really tried to stop being abusive. Then we found out Quebec was cheating on us all along...so yeah, we got pissed...and decided to give you guys the silent treatment. What we need now is to go to a marriage councillor to help us work out our relationship, and if the councillor tells us it would be best to separate, then I'll have no problems. <br /> <br />The problem now is fitting in time and effort towards making our relationship work. Right now, we're too busy trying to prevent our neighbour from destroying us.

[Guest]

[QUOTE]That arguement can be used for every region in Canada, we all carry Canada, because that is what Canada is: a mosaic of regions each contributing their own ideas creating a unique society of societies. A nation of nations. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Canada is an anglo-saxon country with 9 english-speaking provinces and 1 french-speaking province. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Quebec has contributed a lot to Canada's mosaic, so have English Canadians, Scots, Irish, the First Nations, Inuit, et cetera, maybe not to the same degree, but they're all just as valid. Nation is an ambiguous term...a nation can be a country, a culture, or an ethnicity.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Don't try to make an omelet out of the different components of Canada. Canada is an anglo-saxon nation with ethnic communities integrated into the mainstream society. Quebec is a french-speaking nation with ethnic communities integrated into the mainstream society. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Growing up and living in Toronto, I have learned to respect a multicultural, multi-linguistic community. If these communities can all get along here, I find it hard to belive a multicultural nation cannot stay together harmoniously. Maybe this is why the heart of Quebec federalism is Montreal, the most ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse city in Quebec. Maybe that's why I can't comprehend why a culture should constitute a separate country. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />We are not an ethnic group. We are a nation but are not recognized as such. As to immigrants in Montreal, sure they will be on the federalist side, although things are changing thanks to bill 101. When they received their Candian citizenship, they feel they have to pledge allegeance to Canada. <br /> <br />But when we're given culture as the main reason for [QUOTE]separation, than I have to wonder, why not Chinatown? Why not Little Italy? Why not Danforth (the Greek area)?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Quebec has its language, its institutions, its government and its own napoleonian code. There is no comparison to any ethnic community. We function as a country. Our identity is the main reason for sovereignty, closely followed by money. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]So I have to assume Quebec sovereigntists are anti-multicultural...afterall, the Eastern Townships have been "Linguistically Clensed" as it were. French-speaking people in Ontario have as much right as English-speaking people to use their language, especially in areas where they make up a majority. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I don't do demagogy, but I will tell you that Quebec is an extremely inclusive society. We want the immigrants on our side, hence the implementation of Bill 101. Don't even compare the rights of franco outside Quebec to anglo-quebeckers. Anglo-quebeckers are frustrated to see their language take a back seat, but, hey, what do you expect when you have been living among 85% francophones for centuries without even acknowledging them? It's payback time now. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]The PQ goovernment of Quebec made it impossible for English-speaking people to use the English language in English-speaking areas in communication with the government and governing institutions[/QUOTE]. <br /> <br />The government represents the francophone majority. Same as your provincial governments represent the anglo majority, except for N.B. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]For this reason, elderly people in the Eastern Townships that exclusively speak English are not even given the right to use their language in a hospital...that can be a life or death situation for an elderly person.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />What about French people in Saguenay or Abitibi who don't even have a family doctor? That could be a life or death situation. What about a unilingual francophone who can't get services in French in a hospital in PEI? <br /> <br />As to Quebec, when resources are scarce, a lot of people aren't happy. Have you heard of the Montfort hospital? The only French hospital outside Quebec and Harris shut it. It has become a giant clinic. Anglos in Montreal have their hospitals. If francos outside Quebec were treated like anglos in Quebec, it would be paradise on earth. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Considering this has probably the worst time in Canadian history for the bashing of any province. I mean, every province is made fun of by those in other provinces...and you have to also consider that most of the "Quebec-bashers" you speak of are actually separatist bashers, many from Quebec itself. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />The anglo press is unanimous in its treatment of Quebec. Bashing is the norm. Everybody may be made fun of by everybody, but Quebec is the big winner. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]If anyone has reason to separate because of province-bashing its Newfoundland and Labrador.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Because they don't raise the issue doesn't mean that we can't raise it. <br />[QUOTE] <br /> What we need now is to go to a marriage councillor to help us work out our relationship, and if the councillor tells us it would be best to separate, then I'll have no problems. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />We have spent too much time, money and energy on this. It's time to part. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]The problem now is fitting in time and effort towards making our relationship work. Right now, we're too busy trying to prevent our neighbour from destroying us.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />We are already a country in our hearts and heads. What you do now with your life, like trying to prevent your neighbour from destroying you, is your problem.

[lesouris]

[QUOTE BY= Delenda Carthago] <br />Canada is an anglo-saxon country with 9 english-speaking provinces and 1 french-speaking province.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Don't try to make an omelet out of the different components of Canada. Canada is an anglo-saxon nation with ethnic communities integrated into the mainstream society. Quebec is a french-speaking nation with ethnic communities integrated into the mainstream society.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /> <br />Almost a quarter of Ontarians speak neither English nor French as a First Language. And frankly speaking as a descendant of Irish immigrants, I am offended by your assertion that all English-speakers are Anglo-Saxon. Unfortuantely you assume those of us from other nations that were invaded by the British (if you could even consider Quebec a nation at a time, and not just a colony of imperial France) had the benefit of a tidy little peice of legislation that protected our languages like French was protected in Canada, so to you I say in my people's dwindling tongue <i>Is maith an scéalaí an aimsir</i>. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I don't do demagogy, but I will tell you that Quebec is an extremely inclusive society. We want the immigrants on our side, hence the implementation of Bill 101. Don't even compare the rights of franco outside Quebec to anglo-quebeckers. Anglo-quebeckers are frustrated to see their language take a back seat, but, hey, what do you expect when you have been living among 85% francophones for centuries without even acknowledging them? It's payback time now.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Revenge and politics should not mix, however, if Quebec ever does separate, you can expect the same treatment from all the Canadian politicans you pissed off. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]The government represents the francophone majority. Same as your provincial governments represent the anglo majority, except for N.B.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Your forgetting every single area in Ontario with a francophone minority that has required French services, including Toronto, Northern Ontatio, the Windsor Area, and Ottawa area. Your also forgetting St. Boniface in Manitoba, and every territory. You are also forgetting that Quebec's anglophone community is two times larger per capita than Ontario and Manitoba's francophone population, as well as being 3 times larger per capita than the territory with the largest francophone minority. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]What about French people in Saguenay or Abitibi who don't even have a family doctor? That could be a life or death situation. What about a unilingual francophone who can't get services in French in a hospital in PEI?[/QUOTE] <br />Canada has a shortage of doctors all over. In Ontario there are areas where doctors are raffled off as in a lottery. There aren't enough hospitals anywhere, and thanks to Harris (who I personally dislike very much) there are now even fewer. I cannot speak for PEI since I have never been there and know no one from there. <br /> <br />[QUOTE] <br />As to Quebec, when resources are scarce, a lot of people aren't happy. Have you heard of the Montfort hospital? The only French hospital outside Quebec and Harris shut it. It has become a giant clinic. Anglos in Montreal have their hospitals. If francos outside Quebec were treated like anglos in Quebec, it would be paradise on earth. <br />[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Again, I am no fan of Harris at all, he screwed Ontario over. If I had my way, French would be an official langauge of Ontario (Ontario, unlike Quebec, has no official lanuages) along with English, and would be availabe in all hospitals. But, simply because a hospital is not fully-French does not mean they do not provide services in French. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]The anglo press is unanimous in its treatment of Quebec. Bashing is the norm. Everybody may be made fun of by everybody, but Quebec is the big winner.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Are you kidding? Maybe inside of Quebec, the "anglo press" bashes Quebec's government, NOT Quebec, but in Ontario and other parts of Canada, we, like the Quebec press, tend to focus on the problems facing our own province. I suggest you read the Toronto Star, the only time they ever mention Quebec regularily is in an editorial by a Francophone Quebecer, who usually comments on how die hard separatists are responsible for the decline of the PQ. <br /> <br />[QUOTE] <br />We have spent too much time, money and energy on this. It's time to part. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Yes because not enough time, money and energy has been spent on the two referenda that saw separatists defeated (if you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic). <br /> <br />[QUOTE]We are already a country in our hearts and heads. What you do now with your life, like trying to prevent your neighbour from destroying you, is your problem. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I think its naive of you to assume that a separate Quebec would not incur American agression. Most would probably see you guys as an even more socialist, anti-american, europe-loving excuse for a nation that should have been invaded by the US when it had the chance. Don't get me wrong, I am a socialist europe-lover with some resentment towards the US, but Quebec and the US probably wouldn't see eye-to-eye on a lot of issues, and if you thought the mad cow scare was bad... <br /> <br />Plus, you know, Canada probably wouldn't stand idly by if the US did try and support a separate Quebec government. <br /> <br />BTW, it appears that Quebec is already a country in the hearts and heads of only a minority of Quebecers. <br /> <br />Oh, and I had one more question, if Quebec ever did separate, do you think it would remain a member of the Commonwealth of Nations (even if it abandoned the Monarchy)?

[Guest]

<b>LeSouris</b> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Almost a quarter of Ontarians speak neither English nor French as a First Language. And frankly speaking as a descendant of Irish immigrants, I am offended by your assertion that all English-speakers are Anglo-Saxon. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />But they will speak <u>English</u> when they are fully integrated. Give them time. Ethnic minorities eventually integrate in the anglo-saxon mold, not with the french-speaking minority. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Unfortuantely you assume those of us from other nations that were invaded by the British (if you could even consider Quebec a nation at a time, and not just a colony of imperial France) had the benefit of a tidy little peice of legislation that protected our languages like French was protected in Canada, so to you I say in my people's dwindling tongue <i>Is maith an scéalaí an aimsir</i>.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I don`t understand what you`re trying to say here. Are you saying that we demand too much compensation as an invaded people, compared to what other invaded people got? Well, if it can prevent any invasions to occur again, it is a good thing, don`t you think? <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Revenge and politics should not mix, however, if Quebec ever does separate, you can expect the same treatment from all the Canadian politicans you pissed off.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Sorry if that sounded like revenge, but this is not what I meant. Lévesque, with Bill 101, wanted to bring anglophones's rights in Quebec at par with franco rights elsewhere. Can't blame him for that. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Your forgetting every single area in Ontario with a francophone minority that has required French services, including Toronto, Northern Ontatio, the Windsor Area, and Ottawa area. Your also forgetting St. Boniface in Manitoba, and every territory. You are also forgetting that Quebec's anglophone community is two times larger per capita than Ontario and Manitoba's francophone population, as well as being 3 times larger per capita than the territory with the largest francophone minority.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />But as you say, Ontario is not bilingual. The franco population was very important in Canada at some point and it has gone down now to about 4%. They have been assimilated and the assimilation continues at an alarming rate. French was forbidden in Manitoba from 1890 to 1980. Ontario forbid French too in 1917. The federal government was English from wall to wall, even in Quebec. <br /> <br />Do not compare the situation of francos outside Quebec to anglos in Quebec. When have you seen anglos in Quebec getting assimilated into the french majority? (I wanted to say something sarcastic here, but I won`t say it). <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Canada has a shortage of doctors all over. In Ontario there are areas where doctors are raffled off as in a lottery. There aren't enough hospitals anywhere, and thanks to Harris (who I personally dislike very much) there are now even fewer. I cannot speak for PEI since I have never been there and know no one from there.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Then don`t blame Quebec for not having the resources to offer services in English to an anglo in the townships. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]But, simply because a hospital is not fully-French does not mean they do not provide services in French.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br /><u>FALSE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE.</u> Try to convince Gisèle Lalonde of that. The management, the training of doctors, everything was French in that hospital. In the English hospitals in Montreal, do you think the management and the training of doctors are done in French, although services are provided in English? No. The management and the training are in English. No anglos would want a French executive board. Double standards die hard! <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Are you kidding? Maybe inside of Quebec, the "anglo press" bashes Quebec's government, NOT Quebec, but in Ontario and other parts of Canada, we, like the Quebec press, tend to focus on the problems facing our own province. I suggest you read the Toronto Star, the only time they ever mention Quebec regularily is in an editorial by a Francophone Quebecer, who usually comments on how die hard separatists are responsible for the decline of the PQ.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Read the Gazette, the Citizen, and other Asper(agus) papers, the National post (from coast-to-coast), Mordecai Richler (RIP), the whole Sun papers, Diane Francis, Barbara Yaffe, Paul Wells, the old Fotheringham, Barbara Amiel (thank God she`s shut her dirty mouth lately), Andrew Coyne, etc. etc. All are certified Quebec-bashers. <br /> <br />True, the Toronto Star isn`t as bad. However, there is a columnist, Miro Cernetig, that covers Quebec. I don`t even know if he speaks French or if he has ever been to Quebec. His point of view tends to be from an anglo West-Island perspective, complaining about anglo rights not being respected. It is not exactly truly rrepresentative of Quebec. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]We have spent too much time, money and energy on this. It's time to part. <br /> <br />Yes because not enough time, money and energy has been spent on the two referenda that saw separatists defeated (if you can't tell, I'm being sarcastic).[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Don`t imagine that the sovereigntist movement in Quebec is there for fun. There is a reason behind it. Refusal of formal recognition for our nation comes first, closely followed by economic decisions. <br /> <br />I[QUOTE] think its naive of you to assume that a separate Quebec would not incur American agression. Most would probably see you guys as an even more socialist, anti-american, europe-loving excuse for a nation that should have been invaded by the US when it had the chance. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Ohhhh! Here comes the bogeyman again! <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Plus, you know, Canada probably wouldn't stand idly by if the US did try and support a separate Quebec government.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Canada isn`t interested in watching the TSE plummet to 500! <br /> <br />[QUOTE]BTW, it appears that Quebec is already a country in the hearts and heads of only a minority of Quebecers.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />...correction, in the hearts and heads of a majority of <u>french Quebeckers</u>. We`re working on convincing the rest. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]Oh, and I had one more question, if Quebec ever did separate, do you think it would remain a member of the Commonwealth of Nations (even if it abandoned the Monarchy?[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />No.

[lesouris]

As you said earlier, we both seem to have strong opinions on this subject. So we peobably won't ever solve our dilemma as neither of us are willing to concede anything, and we've both put spin on our facts. Unfortunately, this is all too common in the Separatist-Federalist debate. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]But they will speak English when they are fully integrated. Give them time. Ethnic minorities eventually integrate in the anglo-saxon mold, not with the french-speaking minority. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Tell that to the fourth generation Italians in Toronto who still speak mainly Italian, the Mennonites of Southwest Ontario who still speak German, the Jews who speak mainly Yiddish, et cetera. Sure they know English, the majority of Anglophones and Allophones in Quebec can also speak French. Your view that immigrant communities in Quebec will not be assimilated linguistically is comical at best (unlike in Quebec, signs in Ontario can be predominantly in any language the store/business wants [and believe me, groups in Ontario do use signs in many many languages]). <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I don`t understand what you`re trying to say here. Are you saying that we demand too much compensation as an invaded people, compared to what other invaded people got? Well, if it can prevent any invasions to occur again, it is a good thing, don`t you think? [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />No, I'm saying Quebecers could be at least thankful that they still have their language and culture intact. <br /> <br />France was an imperial power when it <i>invaded</i> Canada. England was an imperial power when it <i>invaded</i> New France. France, as an imperial power, gave England, as an imperial power, New France in exchange for Guadaloupe. Calling Canada an invading power is as spurious as calling Quebec an invading power, and I don't care how good you were to the Aboriginals because that would be quite hypocritical of you who said that no invasion should be measured upto others in what the invaded got out of it. <br /> <br />I personally think that this website, as one for Canadian sovereingty, has way too much content concerning Quebec separatism. Therefore, I refuse to respond to anymore posts in this thread unless they are personal attacks. I regret ever starting this this thread.

[Guest]

[QUOTE]Your view that immigrant communities in Quebec will not be assimilated linguistically is comical at best [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />I said that immigrants are assmiliated into English in the ROC and into French in Quebec. <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I don`t understand what you`re trying to say here. Are you saying that we demand too much compensation as an invaded people, compared to what other invaded people got? Well, if it can prevent any invasions to occur again, it is a good thing, don`t you think? [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />[QUOTE]No, I'm saying Quebecers could be at least thankful that they still have their language and culture intact.[/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Thankful? Who should we thank for that? If our culture and language is still intact, it is only because of our will to keep it. Read Lord Durham report. Everything was tried to assimilate us. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]France was an imperial power when it <i>invaded</i> Canada. England was an imperial power when it <i>invaded</i> New France. France, as an imperial power, gave England, as an imperial power, New France in exchange for Guadaloupe. Calling Canada an invading power is as spurious as calling Quebec an invading power, [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />Canada in 1867 was founded according to the British empire rules. <br /> <br /> <br />[QUOTE]I personally think that this website, as one for Canadian sovereingty, has way too much content concerning Quebec separatism. Therefore, I refuse to respond to anymore posts in this thread unless they are personal attacks. I regret ever starting this this thread. [/QUOTE] <br /> <br />There is a provincial section in this site, and it is not supposed to contain any topic related to Quebec, according to you? If Quebec separation is discussed in other sections, I'm not aware of it. <br /> <br />I don`t post and don`t participate in other discussions on this site. So don`t come here if you don`t want to talk about Quebec. <br /> <br />Besides, I am not here to convince anybody and I won`t be convinced either. I am here to express myself and what I think is the mainstream point of view in French Quebec. On Quebec affairs, nobody will get the last word with me. <br /> <br />You say you regret having started that thread. Maybe you didn't like what you saw. I don`t know why you mention personal attacks because you will not get personal attacks from me. <br />