A nation Within canada

November 28, 2006 06:10 +0000 | Society & Culture 4

I was having trouble articulating this earlier, but I think that I understand why now. Canada is an emotional topic for me, especially when it comes to its founding peoples. We're more than a country, we're a nation with a rich history -- and it includes Quebec.

More than just the province that tries to separate every few years, Quebec is a founding pillar of Canada. No, this isn't a technical term and no, it's not something that can be really quantified, but consider he following:

"The Hockey Sweater" ("Le chandail de hockey")
Poutine
The Van Doos
Pierre Trudeau
The Montreal Canadiens
"Joie de Vivre"
The Plains of Abraham
Carnaval de Québec
Je me souviens
The FLQ
Schwartz's (yes, Wikipedia even covers the famous delicatessen)
Bonne-homme de neige

This is Our Canada, the Good and the Bad, and it's all from the same place. Their history is our history. They've given us a world-renowned military tradition, amazing food, and an attitude that helped to shape this country for what it is: one of tolerance and humility. The fact that a majority of every party in the house would support an obvious step toward removing Quebec from this family cuts me very deep and I'm not sure I'll ever forgive them.

Comments

Melanie
28 Nov 2006, 8:22 p.m. |

The Hockey Sweater is one of my favourite kids books, although I'm still not sure why.

It's sitting in my closet with my other favourite kids books. I wanted to make sure I stocked up, in case you couldn't find them anymore by the time I have kids.

Please don't get the idea that having Quebec separate from Canada would make me happy - or that it would not upset me in any way. I would be very sad to see my country divided. I just don't think it's appropriate to hold them if they (all of them) decide they would rather not be a part of Canada any longer. We would still share a history if they decided to go their own way. They've still helped to shape who we are, collectively.

A separate nation within Canada is just insane, though. I don't think I can even begin to wrap my head around that one.

Angela
28 Nov 2006, 11 p.m. |

Dan, I love what you're trying to say, but 1) Roch Voisine is from NEW BRUNSWICK, and 2) it's "joie de VIVRE."

But otherwise, I'm right there with you.

Andrea
28 Nov 2006, 11:22 p.m. |

I think you misunderstand what is going on here.
The Bloc brought this up recently, thinking it would be turned down by the gov't and then it would be able to push for yet another separation movement - blah blah blah.

Instead what they got was the gov't (all parties) saying that this is a great idea - lets make it official NOW!!! the bloc's bluff had been called - they had to support this - even though it effectively takes away their BIGGEST card towards the separation agreement....

If you want more info on this point of view - I've seen other takes on this - but the one who explains this the best is in the Toronto Star a column by Chantel Hebert "Duceppe's humiliation"

its all about the politics

Daniel
29 Nov 2006, 3:17 a.m. |

Angela:
Thanks for pointing those out. I had no idea Roch was from NB -- a testament to their true bilingualism I suppose. As for Joie de Vivre, believe it or not, I spent 20minutes looking for the right spelling, then promptly forgot to change it. Thanks for noticing.

Andrea:
I've heard the argument, but I'm just not buying it. The House of Commons, the governing body of the country has declared that the Quebecois are a nation. No matter how you look at that, it's still a step toward a divided Canada. Even if it's not what the bloc wanted, it's still agreeing that deep down, Quebec isn't Canadian... and I can't go along with that.