State of the Nation
I don't have a lot to say about the sorry sight of our federal politicians trying to have their gateau (Quebec is a nation!) and eat it too (but don't worry, that's just a meaningless phrase!). And this comes from someone who has always been relatively indifferent to the prospect of Quebec separating. I figure, if 70% of Quebecers vote in favour of separating, then it only makes sense to let them go (70% may seem high, but if it takes 60% to change the electoral system, breaking up the country should require at least 70%).
But that's not really the point. The point is that federal politicians should be responsible adults, and responsible adults shouldn't be needlessly stirring up trouble - either through their own myopia (Ignatieff) or due to a congenital preference for being clever as opposed to doing what is right (Harper). Quebec, like the rest of the provinces, is always making demands on the federal government, and taking the easy road of always giving in to win votes is not the route to a strong successful federal government.
In his brilliant book, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, one of the many points Joseph Schumpeter made was that Democracy can be analyzed from an economic perspective. And if you ask me, it seems like there is market-share to be gained for a federal party which actually represents what I suspect is the majority view on this issue - that if we're talking nation, as in Nation, as in League of Nations, United Nations, National government etc., then Quebec is clearly not a nation. And if we're talking nation as in a bunch of people who share a bunch of defining attributes and live in (or used to live in) roughly the same part of the map, then there are a whole lot of nations within the boundaries of the Nation of Canada: First Nations, Alberta nation, Leaf Nation, Richmond, you get the picture. Maybe Quebec is the biggest or the most vocal or the most clearly defined of these small 'n' nations, but I'm still pretty sure that it is unwise to single them out for special 'national' recognition.
I guess we'll see if any politicians emerge to supply what I strongly suspect the people of Canada demand - a politician who thinks standing up for Canada is something you do, not a slogan you paint on a sign to try and win votes so you can gain power, turn around and gain more votes by selling Canada out. Hopefully, if things do swing back towards the responsible federalist position on this, they don't swing too far in the other direction leading to the rise of xenophobic politics.
If we're lucky, the whole thing will just blow over.
But that's not really the point. The point is that federal politicians should be responsible adults, and responsible adults shouldn't be needlessly stirring up trouble - either through their own myopia (Ignatieff) or due to a congenital preference for being clever as opposed to doing what is right (Harper). Quebec, like the rest of the provinces, is always making demands on the federal government, and taking the easy road of always giving in to win votes is not the route to a strong successful federal government.
In his brilliant book, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, one of the many points Joseph Schumpeter made was that Democracy can be analyzed from an economic perspective. And if you ask me, it seems like there is market-share to be gained for a federal party which actually represents what I suspect is the majority view on this issue - that if we're talking nation, as in Nation, as in League of Nations, United Nations, National government etc., then Quebec is clearly not a nation. And if we're talking nation as in a bunch of people who share a bunch of defining attributes and live in (or used to live in) roughly the same part of the map, then there are a whole lot of nations within the boundaries of the Nation of Canada: First Nations, Alberta nation, Leaf Nation, Richmond, you get the picture. Maybe Quebec is the biggest or the most vocal or the most clearly defined of these small 'n' nations, but I'm still pretty sure that it is unwise to single them out for special 'national' recognition.
I guess we'll see if any politicians emerge to supply what I strongly suspect the people of Canada demand - a politician who thinks standing up for Canada is something you do, not a slogan you paint on a sign to try and win votes so you can gain power, turn around and gain more votes by selling Canada out. Hopefully, if things do swing back towards the responsible federalist position on this, they don't swing too far in the other direction leading to the rise of xenophobic politics.
If we're lucky, the whole thing will just blow over.
posted by Declan at
Friday, November 24, 2006
3 Comments:
Just a few thoughts I have on the subject that are not overly enlightning, but that might be worth sharing.
First, between the French and English languages the word (N)nation has 'distinct' meanings. In English politics, nation is generally thought of as your Nation, however, in Quebec, it generally has the small n meaning - and as such, not much to do with separatism or their country, Canada.
Second, take careful note that it is Quebecers, and not Quebec that is being given the title of a nation.
Lastly, in the grand scheme of things this was a suberbly smooth way of the Conservative government making in roads in Quebec while taking from the Bloc. Politically, very shrewd. As for the big picture, this will likely have about as much effect as recognizing Quebec as 'distinct' did. Little.
By
Anonymous, at 10:11 AM
"Lastly, in the grand scheme of things this was a suberbly smooth way of the Conservative government making in roads in Quebec while taking from the Bloc. Politically, very shrewd. As for the big picture, this will likely have about as much effect as recognizing Quebec as 'distinct' did. Little."
This may be true, but what it amount to (in my opinion) is saying that Quebecers are idiots whose votes can be bought cheaply with empty meaningless phrases.
By
Declan, at 11:43 AM
I'll tell you right now that anyone who lives on an island considers life on that island to be entirely unique. And it is - in some sense.
I have to admit mostly having to look at Spooky to see what kind of reaction that Plastic Man's comments would receive from Quebec, and my word, wasn't he sputtering? Interesting, but not terribly understandable.
My feeling is that much of the seperatist movement runs on emotion rather than reason - a phrase, seemingly meaningless to English Canada, might be what many in Quebec feel they are fighting over.
By
Thursday, at 3:10 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home