Quebec General Election 2014

[On Guard for Thee]

Funny thing happened on the way to the opera. And I know I'll get feedback from this. But I took a notion I wanted to hear some old archive of any old Peter Gzowski interview as I am an old fan and hadn't heard that smoky voice in some time.. Well google presented me with a multitude but I just happenned to pick this one and as it unfolded I thought how appropos! (sp) for this day.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/Digital+Archives/CBC+Programs/Radio/Morningside/ID/1801911648/

[Michael Hardner]

Russel Peters has some great jokes to say about us whities being a minority. I won't repeat them here, but they are hilarious.

Canadians will never be a minority, though. A Canadian culture will change, but it will continue.

The idea that dirty immigrants are ruining the country lurks behind these arguments and it's been used for a long time.

[Michael Hardner]

And has now announced her resignation.

Taking the thread back from the drift...

I'm actually stunned with the result. After a long tenure by the Charest Liberals, the PQ had a window to establish itself and slowly foment a rise of nationalist ideas again. They blundered it. Why ?

Many questions:

Was it that the Liberal leader was such a non-politician that (like Rob Ford) the people identified with him ?

Was it the accord ?

Was it the mismatch of right-wing media mogul PKP and the party ?

And... does it really mean that we have returned to a status quo of two solitudes - two (or more) separate cultures acknowledging, if not overtly accepting their national union ?

Should Harper be getting more credit for his strategy of saying nothing than he is ? Do you think that Chretien would have been in power for a result like this - staying absolutely out of the election ?

Let's see what August1991 says.

[Michael Hardner]

I'm reading that Couillard said something about letting Quebeckers having more opportunities to learn English ?

That is... something... the world has been opening, forming relationships, now for 20 or 30 years... the new world has come to Quebec now too ?

[Boges]

So apparently the pundits are calling the PQ movement a generational thing and the 30% is pretty much where it will be until the Boomers that built the movement start dying off.

Edited April 8, 2014 by Charles Anthony
extraneous video link deleted

[Michael Hardner]

So apparently the pundits are calling the PQ movement a generational thing and the 30% is pretty much where it will be until the Boomers that built the movement start dying off.

Perhaps this is true, but there are perhaps lessons to learn in how this movement transformed Quebec.

[Black Dog]

So apparently the pundits are calling the PQ movement a generational thing and the 30% is pretty much where it will be until the Boomers that built the movement start dying off.

Makes sense as I doubt many of the post-Boomer generations have much experience with the grievances that spawned the Quite Revolution and the separatist movement. If anything, the Quebecois are a privileged caste these days. I have to wonder if the xenophobia and hysteria that the PQ and its acolytes tried to whip up with the values business wasn't an attempt to stoke some of that old "us vs. them" divisions.

[Black Dog]

Definition of melting pot: All of the people in a society would blend together to form one basic cultural norm based on the dominant culture.

Multicultural: many different types of social and cultural lifestyles

That's the theory. In practice, though, people in melting pot societies retain plenty of their cultural norms, while immigrants to multicultural societies will just as often adopt the norms of their new homes.

[Argus]

So apparently the pundits are calling the PQ movement a generational thing and the 30% is pretty much where it will be until the Boomers that built the movement start dying off.

The idea separatism is dead is silly. I see ZERO attachment to Canada on the part of the majority of Quebecers. Most of them are extremely insular and rarely even think of Canada, and their media, on the occasion it actually covers a story outside Quebec, does so as if covering a foreign country. There is only one reason Quebecers don't want to separate, and that's money. The instant they believe they can do as well on their own as they do within Canada they will be gone.

[overthere]

The idea separatism is dead is silly. I see ZERO attachment to Canada on the part of the majority of Quebecers. Most of them are extremely insular and rarely even think of Canada, and their media, on the occasion it actually covers a story outside Quebec, does so as if covering a foreign country. There is only one reason Quebecers don't want to separate, and that's money. The instant they believe they can do as well on their own as they do within Canada they will be gone.

No doubt they are usually pragmatic to an extent not found in the ROC.

That's why I see a shift to the Libs and PCs in the next federal election. Those parties are the fountain of federal gravy, not parties like the NDP and Bloc.

Perhap one of the more sordid aspects of our journey as a nation is that all regions now take their govt relationship cues from Quebec. It has made regional self interest the standard, not the exception.

[On Guard for Thee]

Taking the thread back from the drift...

I'm actually stunned with the result. After a long tenure by the Charest Liberals, the PQ had a window to establish itself and slowly foment a rise of nationalist ideas again. They blundered it. Why ?

Many questions:

Was it that the Liberal leader was such a non-politician that (like Rob Ford) the people identified with him ?

Was it the accord ?

Was it the mismatch of right-wing media mogul PKP and the party ?

And... does it really mean that we have returned to a status quo of two solitudes - two (or more) separate cultures acknowledging, if not overtly accepting their national union ?

Should Harper be getting more credit for his strategy of saying nothing than he is ? Do you think that Chretien would have been in power for a result like this - staying absolutely out of the election ?

Let's see what August1991 says.

I think all of the "many questions' you have laid out here had strong effects. But I think the biggest mistake was made when PKP put his fist in the air and talked about the country of Quebec. I guess they ignored previous polling which suggested 67% of Quebecers were not interested in a referendum on sovereignty. Marois following that up with speeches stating Quebeecrs could still visit Victoria and others could visit PQ and not have to pay at the frontier, and that they would keep the looney didn't help either. Then the attempt to backpedal suggested some sort of coverup and she lost support. Boy did she lose support!

[jbg]

I think all of the "many questions' you have laid out here had strong effects. But I think the biggest mistake was made when PKP put his fist in the air and talked about the country of Quebec. I guess they ignored previous polling which suggested 67% of Quebecers were not interested in a referendum on sovereignty. Marois following that up with speeches stating Quebeecrs could still visit Victoria and others could visit PQ and not have to pay at the frontier, and that they would keep the looney didn't help either. Then the attempt to backpedal suggested some sort of coverup and she lost support. Boy did she lose support!

The problem is that separation is the raison d'etre of the PQ. While the PQ has repeatedly soft-pedaled this issue in most of the elections since their first participation in the 1976 election, no one nowadays is fooled.

The PQ ran on a "good government" platform in 1976 and won. Come 1980 Levesque had to put separation into play since separation is the raison d'etre of the PQ. Same process leading to 1995. Also, same Liberal Premier, Bourassa, ousted by the PQ's. Rinse, wash, repeat. Even though good government is what got the Liberals turfed both times (apparently there was as much corruption and/or incompetence in both Bourassa mandates) any PQ government at some point has to seek separation. At least Marois and her candidates were candid about that and got slaughtered at the polls.

[BubberMiley]

The problem is that separation is the raison d'etre of the PQ. While the PQ has repeatedly soft-pedaled this issue in..

You forgot to mention you know nothing about Canadian politics.

[August1991]

Which has what to do with multiculturalism, exactly?

I have to concur with the spirit of BD's question. So many people have interpreted the word "multiculturalism" in so many ways. But in English Canada now, it is almost a shibboleth: if you like multiculturalism, you're a leftist and if you don't like it, you're on the right.

To me, multiculturalism retains its original meaning: there is no State culture. Canada is a bilingual State but it's a multicultural country.

Edited April 11, 2014 by August1991

[August1991]

Many questions:

Was it that the Liberal leader was such a non-politician that (like Rob Ford) the people identified with him ?

Was it the accord ?

Was it the mismatch of right-wing media mogul PKP and the party ?

And... does it really mean that we have returned to a status quo of two solitudes - two (or more) separate cultures acknowledging, if not overtly accepting their national union ?

Should Harper be getting more credit for his strategy of saying nothing than he is ? Do you think that Chretien would have been in power for a result like this - staying absolutely out of the election ?

I tend to agree with the analysis of Pierre Paradis (Lib MNA). Until Péladeau's press conference, people were suspicious but willing to believe that the PQ would not hold a referendum/promote sovereignty too much if given a majority. With Péladeau's raised fist, the cat was out of the sack. (Immediately after the press conference, many in the PQ were jubilant (eg. Parizeau) because they believe that the PQ should be open and clear about its objectives.) When Marois started talking about passports and borders, people really turned off the PQ. Few people in Quebec want to hear this broken record again. From this point in the campaign, you can see the poll numbers of the PQ go down.

=====

Couillard did not win the election - but he avoided losing it. Accord? The "values charter" played a role but less critical than might appear.

I think that Canada may have now entered a new phase in federal-provincial relations (or English-French relations) or Quebec nationalism is entering a new phase. Take your pick.

IMHO, a significant detail of this election: the PQ in April 2014 received about 25.4% of the vote. The BQ in May 2011 received about 23.4% of the Quebec vote.

Even under the best conditions (a corrupt, unpopular government and tumult in the streets) in 2012, the PQ could at best get 32%.

=======

Should Harper get credit for this? I think that the better question is to ask whether he will. And the answer is yes - for what it's worth. A few voters in English Canada care about whether Canadians get along or not. People care more if we're not getting along.

This is a problem that Harper has fortunately avoided. In 2015, he can go into a campaign presenting himself as a leader who takes care of issues so that they don't become a problem. He'll be to federal politics what William Davis was to Ontario.

Edited April 11, 2014 by August1991

[jbg]

You forgot to mention you know nothing about Canadian politics.

That's true.

[Michael Hardner]

Should Harper get credit for this? I think that the better question is to ask whether he will. And the answer is yes - for what it's worth. A few voters in English Canada care about whether Canadians get along or not. People care more if we're not getting along.

This is a problem that Harper has fortunately avoided. In 2015, he can go into a campaign presenting himself as a leader who takes care of issues so that they don't become a problem. He'll be to federal politics what William Davis was to Ontario.

It's a bit of an odd comparison as Davis was generally liked and Harper seems to be reviled. I think that taking credit for his handling of the Quebec election will need to be done carefully, as it would annoy Quebecers, and undo his original intention, if he implied that the electorate could be manipulated by his master strategies.

Great assessment, by the way, thank you for that.

[August1991]

It's a bit of an odd comparison as Davis was generally liked and Harper seems to be reviled.

I don't think that Bill Davis was "liked" - but Ontario politics are different from federal politics. Stephen Harper is respected, like Mackenzie King.

And unlike King, Harper fortunately has some understanding/appreciation of Quebec society.

[jbg]

I don't think that Bill Davis was "liked" - but Ontario politics are different from federal politics. Stephen Harper is respected, like Mackenzie King.

And unlike King, Harper fortunately has some understanding/appreciation of Quebec society.

You mean "one Jew would be too many" King?

[Bob Macadoo]

The idea separatism is dead is silly. I see ZERO attachment to Canada on the part of the majority of Quebecers. Most of them are extremely insular and rarely even think of Canada, and their media, on the occasion it actually covers a story outside Quebec, does so as if covering a foreign country. There is only one reason Quebecers don't want to separate, and that's money. The instant they believe they can do as well on their own as they do within Canada they will be gone.

I find these statements peculiar. They're stated with the intended affect to mean the ROC is some homogeneous collective and QC is alone. Couldn't be farther than the truth. We are all distinct societies that have deep differences and we have only accepted collectivism as we see benefits to it. Like any other society if we thought we could go it alone.....we would in a heartbeat....ala Western separatism, past Ontario superiority, QC "snobbery", East Coast isolationism......and there'd be a country called The United States of Europia on the other side of the pond.

A BC logger could give a flying fig about a NB salmon farmer and would step on him to move one rung up.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Bob Macadoo

[Argus]

I find these statements peculiar. They're stated with the intended affect to mean the ROC is some homogeneous collective and QC is alone. Couldn't be farther than the truth. We are all distinct societies that have deep differences and we have only accepted collectivism as we see benefits to it. Like any other society if we thought we could go it alone.....we would in a heartbeat....ala Western separatism, past Ontario superiority, QC "snobbery", East Coast isolationism......and there'd be a country called The United States of Europia on the other side of the pond.

A BC logger could give a flying fig about a NB salmon farmer and would step on him to move one rung up.

I don't believe any of this is correct. I have little doubt both BC and Alberta could go it alone quite easily, for example, but there's no interest in separatism out west. Ontario could have gone it alone easily, any time up to the election of Dalton McGuinty's Liberal government, but there was and remains no interest in separatism. The only people who have shown an interest in separatism are Quebecers, despite their long history of demonstrated economic incompetence. People in other parts of the country think of themselves as Canadians first. Their provinces generlaly come second. People in Quebec think of themselves as Quebecers first, and many don't think of Canada at all.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Argus

[Smallc]

Ontario could still go it alone. They'd have little difficulty, and things would remain relatively status quo

[Bob Macadoo]

I don't believe any of this is correct. I have little doubt both BC and Alberta could go it alone quite easily, for example, but there's no interest in separatism out west. Ontario could have gone it alone easily, any time up to the election of Dalton McGuinty's Liberal government, but there was and remains no interest in separatism. The only people who have shown an interest in separatism are Quebecers, despite their long history of demonstrated economic incompetence. People in other parts of the country think of themselves as Canadians first. Their provinces generlaly come second. People in Quebec think of themselves as Quebecers first, and many don't think of Canada at all.

I'm going to guess non-TO Ontarian. All the knowability, none of the experience.

The provinces stay together for the shared risk such a collective can provide.....yeah Socialism. Even Alta knows at some point the price of oil will dip and their dot-com bubble will burst and they will need to rely on ON minerals as the next resource "gold mine" so to speak. Every region thinks they are better than the collective only QC has the cajones to say it. We all say we are CDN first as it fits on a bumper sticker but we are a result of the region we were developed in. There is no commonality between a Nflder and Albertan other than they both work at the same site

[August1991]

You mean "one Jew would be too many" King?

Give it a rest, jbg. Albert Einstein once supported the progressive concept of euthanasia. What's your point, really?

[August1991]

The only people who have shown an interest in separatism are Quebecers...

That is historically inacccurate. Of the first 19 MPs elected to the federal parliament from Nova Scotia in 1867, 18 opposed Confederation. PEI wanted nothing to do with it and joined later. Even today, it is a distinct island and a peculiar province. Newfoundlanders are well aware that their history and existence extend well beyond "Canada".

Argus, Canada is not a nation; it is a federal country, a civilized association. Who could hope for more?

So let me finish with this quote:

«Tant que les Québécois auront cette qualité de vie, ils ne prendront pas le risque de la compromettre dans une aventure politique...»

François Ricard

The provinces stay together for the shared risk such a collective can provide.....yeah Socialism.

Wow! It is a jump to go from "socialism" to a "federal state" with severe restrictions protecting individual liberty.

Bob, I suggest that you read Tom Paine, the guy who wrote in 1960s modern progressive language: "My country is the world and my religion is to do good."

Edited April 22, 2014 by August1991