Quebec, the French Language, and Quebecois Identity

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by ToxiK

Guy Nantel (celui qui pose les questions) le dit lui-même à ses "victimes", s'ils répondent à 20 questions et qu'ils en manquent une seule, c'est celle-ci qui sera dans le vidéo. Je crois aussi que la caméra est intimidante et que les gens ne sont pas préparés à répondre à des questions. Dans des conditions plus relaxées, les réponses auraient probablement été meilleures et plusieurs personnes s'en sont probablement voulues immédiatement après l'entrevue. La rue n'est pas le meilleur endroit pour avoir des bonnes réponses mais en excellent moyen d'avoir un vidéo comique.

Oui Guy Nantel avoue lui-même qu'il choisit les pires cancres pour ses vidéos.

Rick Mercer de la CBC faisait la même chose pour ses segments Talking to Americans.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by New Brisavoine

The G7 has become largely meaningless. How is Canada doing better than Australia because Canada is part of the G7 and Australia isn't?

I was going to ask about this significant international impact that Canada supposedly has today.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I was going to ask about this significant international impact that Canada supposedly has today.

It seems to me that Canada's last significant international impact may have been the Ottawa Treaty of 1997.

[MolsonExport]

Canada with or sans Quebec will never join the EU, as much as some would like to fantasize about this extremely remote possibility. There are four foreseeable possibilities for Canada (in order of likelihood):

1) Canada remains united with Quebec. By far the most likely outcome.
2) Quebec leaves Canada, Canada reorganizes itself with the remnants, possibly splitting Ontario into several entities to ensure that it does not utterly dominate the rump Canada.
3) Quebec leaves Canada, Atlantic Canada, cast adrift physically from the rest of the country, petitions to join the USA and is eventually absorbed into the USA.
4) Quebec leaves Canada, and Alberta/Saskatchewan elect to join the United States. This would make the rump Canada untenable, and eventually, the remnants get absorbed to the United States.

[Acajack]

Funny how Quebec is huge with a gazillion resources relative to population but there are a couple of factors that supposedly make it completely unviable as a country. Change the circumstances (for example way smaller with fewer resources) and it would still be univable as a country of course.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Canada with or sans Quebec will never join the EU, as much as some would like to fantasize about this extremely remote possibility. There are four foreseeable possibilities for Canada (in order of likelihood):

1) Canada remains united with Quebec. By far the most likely outcome.
2) Quebec leaves Canada, Canada reorganizes itself with the remnants, possibly splitting Ontario into several entities to ensure that it does not utterly dominate the rump Canada.
3) Quebec leaves Canada, Atlantic Canada, cast adrift physically from the rest of the country, petitions to join the USA and is eventually absorbed into the USA.
4) Quebec leaves Canada, and Alberta/Saskatchewan elect to join the United States. This would make the rump Canada untenable, and eventually, the remnants get absorbed to the United States.

I agree with your assessment of the likelihood of the first two possibilities: 99% chance that either Quebec stays in Canada, or in the unlikely event that it does leave, Canada just continues on as Canada-sans-Quebec. The remaining 1% chance is probably that Canada splinters into a few, separate countries.

I've never understood the arguments that without Quebec however, Canada (or parts of it) would just be absorbed into the United States as if Quebec is the only thing keeping them there. Manifest destiny isn't really an extant force anymore, and on our end, I don't think there's much of a desire anywhere (even Alberta) to join the US.

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

2) Quebec leaves Canada, Canada reorganizes itself with the remnants, possibly splitting Ontario into several entities to ensure that it does not utterly dominate the rump Canada.
3) Quebec leaves Canada, Atlantic Canada, cast adrift physically from the rest of the country, petitions to join the USA and is eventually absorbed into the USA.
4) Quebec leaves Canada, and Alberta/Saskatchewan elect to join the United States. This would make the rump Canada untenable, and eventually, the remnants get absorbed to the United States.

I could see scenarios 2, 3 and 4 happening simultaneously or within a very compressed timeline. For #2, carving a bunch of artificial provinces from Ontario will probably end up creating a political franken-monster. Aside from the GTA city state, the rest will likely be have-not entities with no real reason to exist and end up being a financial burden to the Canadian rump state.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Funny how Quebec is huge with a gazillion resources relative to population but there are a couple of factors that supposedly make it completely unviable as a country. Change the circumstances (for example way smaller with fewer resources) and it would still be univable as a country of course.

Check your assumptions at the door, svp.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

I could see scenarios 2, 3 and 4 happening simultaneously or within a very compressed timeline. For #2, carving a bunch of artificial provinces from Ontario will probably end up creating a political franken-monster. Aside from the GTA city state, the rest will likely be have-not entities with no real reason to exist and end up being a financial burden to the Canadian rump state.

Again though, I'm not understanding the circumstances in which this would pan out (unless we're talking about some extremely hypothetical distant future). Support for leaving Canada and joining the US is currently ~0. Why would Quebec leaving suddenly prompt the residents of Alberta or Nova Scotia to en masse support being annexed by the US?

And more importantly, why would the US (a politically dysfunctional place with a ton of inertia) want to annex these places? If they're in a state where they'd willingly give up their independence, it'd only be because things had become seriously bad there (which again, Quebec's independence wouldn't necessarily lead to).

The "without Quebec, Canada would just be annexed by the US" mostly feels like a sort of sovereigntist schadenfreude fantasy.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Funny how Quebec is huge with a gazillion resources relative to population but there are a couple of factors that supposedly make it completely unviable as a country. Change the circumstances (for example way smaller with fewer resources) and it would still be univable as a country of course.

Quebec hasn't been super open to developing most of those resources today. Or they've struggled with financing. How would all of this suddenly improve in an even smaller country with more instability?

Having resources doesn't always mean you will be successful developing them. Just ask the Albertans or Northern Ontarians how that is going ....

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Quebec hasn't been super open to developing most of those resources today. Or they've struggled with financing. How would all of this suddenly improve in an even smaller country with more instability?

Having resources doesn't always mean you will be successful developing them. Just ask the Albertans or Northern Ontarians how that is going ....

Still don't see how this makes Quebec (or Alberta or N Ontario even) any different from any other place in the world. The fact that there can be challenges applies to Canada too.

These places being independent would make certain things simpler I'd say, and of course deprive them of other economic advantages related to being part of Canada. There are pros and cons related to both - probably more pros to being in Canada overall but not 100% on one side over the other. It can vary from region to region or province to province too. Alberta being landlocked is a pretty big challenge of course.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Again though, I'm not understanding the circumstances in which this would pan out (unless we're talking about some extremely hypothetical distant future). Support for leaving Canada and joining the US is currently ~0. Why would Quebec leaving suddenly prompt the residents of Alberta or Nova Scotia to en masse support being annexed by the US?

And more importantly, why would the US (a politically dysfunctional place with a ton of inertia) want to annex these places? If they're in a state where they'd willingly give up their independence, it'd only be because things had become seriously bad there (which again, Quebec's independence wouldn't necessarily lead to).

The "without Quebec, Canada would just be annexed by the US" mostly feels like a sort of sovereigntist schadenfreude fantasy.

Yeah given how controversial and hurtful it is to say that Canada is virtually the same as the US except for Quebec, it's hard to imagine Canada sans Quebec would so quickly move to prove these people were right all along.

Canada (with or without Quebec) being absorbed by the US is a possibility in the future but likely not with Quebec independence as the trigger.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Quebec hasn't been super open to developing most of those resources today. Or they've struggled with financing. How would all of this suddenly improve in an even smaller country with more instability?

Easy answer: an independent Quebec would have to become more open to developing its resources.

If Norway got billions of "equalization kroner" each year from deep coffers in Copenhagen, maybe Norway would have left its oil in the ground, since oil is dirty and Norwegians like the environment. (The current country called Norway actually used to belong to Denmark.)

[lio45]

One eye opener for me was that one time my gf's (very old) grandma passed while I was in Florida and I had to drive to Gaspé for the funeral. About one third of the trip was within Quebec (the first two-thirds, obviously, were in the USA). One can't argue Quebec is too small to be a successful country.

Amusingly, the argument "Quebec would be insignificant on the global stage", which used to have some merit*, has now been greatly diluted by Modern Canada becoming insignificant on the global stage (thanks Justin!).



*Still limited merit, of course. If that argument was good, the Irish would want to be part of the UK and the Ukrainians would want to be part of the Russian Empire, among various examples.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Alberta being landlocked is a pretty big challenge of course.

And Montreal being landlocked would not be a challenge for Quebec?!?!? Your disgusting Anti-AB bias is showing

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by lio45

One eye opener for me was that one time my gf's (very old) grandma passed while I was in Florida and I had to drive to Gaspé for the funeral. About one third of the trip was within Quebec (the first two-thirds, obviously, were in the USA). One can't argue Quebec is too small to be a successful country..

Of course, if you had chosen a different route to the Gaspe, and had crossed into QC at Campbellton NB, your trip in Quebec would have been no more than an hour.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Of course, if you had chosen a different route to the Gaspe, and had crossed into QC at Campbellton NB, your trip in Quebec would have been no more than an hour.

Sure, but that would have been really inefficient, as a route. (The best alternate route actually goes into Ontario, not NB, but then that route forces you to go through the Montreal area, which is bad.)

Best way to Gaspé by far when arriving from the south is 15 north, 30 to the 20, 20 until it becomes the 132.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by lio45

And Montreal being landlocked would not be a challenge for Quebec?!?!? Your disgusting Anti-AB bias is showing

Edmonton has a deepwater port accessible to Panamax ships, whereas Montreal's insignificant port can barely accommodate a few sporting yachts.

[Acajack]

Still trying to wrap my head around that all politicians on all sides including Liberals, plus analysts and economists, say that Quebec would be totally viable as a country, but we are supposed to believe SSP opinions instead.

So all these people are out to lunch but SSP is not?

(Not even saying that independence would be the best option.)

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Yeah given how controversial and hurtful it is to say that Canada is virtually the same as the US except for Quebec, it's hard to imagine Canada sans Quebec would so quickly move to prove these people were right all along.

Any port in a storm, as they say. I don't think it's a fair characteristization you're putting forward here. In an environment where Canada's identity is absolutely crushed (and I think Quebec is central to Canadian identity), I expect what's left of Canada to have a real identity crisis while grasping for stability.

Originally Posted by Acajack

Canada (with or without Quebec) being absorbed by the US is a possibility in the future but likely not with Quebec independence as the trigger.

I think the only way something like this could ever happen is a dissolution of the country. I can't see any other scenarios where large portions of Canadians willing sign up to merge with the US.