Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Quebec Sovereignty Movement

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–106 of 106 posts

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#101

Post by angry_octet »

rayiner wrote: post #70
goosedragons wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Removing the rest of them? Changing the names of all the places named after Catholic Saints? Not having the municipality put up Christmas decorations every year? You know, actually taking action to do that? They only took down the cross in the National Assembly after backlash and calls of hypocrisy. Originally Legault wanted it to stay up. That alone says to me how BS the whole thing is.

> Changing the names of all the places named after Catholic Saints? Not having the municipality put up Christmas decorations every year? But that stuff really is "history and culture" rather than "public endorsement of religion." People in my home country would never tolerate foreign Christians coming in and demanding that the state stop celebrating Eid or changing place names. People are entitled to their heritage,…

To be clear (which Americans get really diverted into believing) this is not about banning Christmas or forcing people to say Happy Holidays. This is the hypocrisy of refusing to let Muslim women cover their hair if they are a public servant (and the Govt sector is large, including pre-school workers, cleaners, teachers, council office workers, librarians, road sweepers, health workers, archivists, town planners, etc) but still having profoundly religious symbols in places like schools, hospitals and other Govt buildings. Also cultural matters, e.g. an incredible refusal to acknowledge that people are fasting during Ramadan.

The use of saint names is unavoidable, a reminder of how the Church used to control everything. It would be a powerful statement of actual secularism if some schools were renamed, even some streets. But most people don't care, they just stopped going to mass and kicked the priests out of schools, job done. Secularism is now code for xenophobia.

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#102

Post by mantas »

angry_octet wrote: post #100
mantas wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Health is primarily a cultural thing. Lifestyle, diet etc. US is stark example how over-the-top money shovelled into healthcare may give abysmal results if culture is lacking. Migrants may be a burden. Denmark recently published a detailed origin-based statistics if migrants are, materially, a positive or negative. Nobody counts few restaurants as multiculturalism. And once you have significant number of outsiders...…

In Quebec the health system (RAMQ) is culture . Everyone is incredibly proud of it (much like the NHS), while also understanding that it is underfunded and struggling. Immigrants understand they will never get a GP unless they move to the country because GP places are gerrymandered, but locals rarely experience this problem. In Quebec, a few restaurants with foreign sounding names is enough to trigger the anti-multic…

Why shit jobs stay with low pay? Because market economy is disrupted and there's no pressure to raise the pay.

In normal countries with social safety net (assuming Canada is one of them), those who do „shit jobs with low pay“, end up receiving from the state more than they pay in taxes.

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#103

Post by TMWNN »

elevaet wrote: post #24
IIAOPSW wrote: post #4

Even more interesting, if it went through the Western half of Canada would effectively be cut off from the bulk of the countries population and economic centers. For this reason, the Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US had the referendum been a success. At that point there probably would have been something of a domino effect, with the other Western provinces doing the same.

> Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US". It would be extremely politically distasteful in Alberta to cede to the USA, such a plan would be political suicide. There have definitely been fringe movements for Albertan Separatism though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_separatism > Governor Premier. Premier lead…

>Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US".

In 1990 the premier of Nova Scotia said that Atlantic Canada would have "no choice" but to join the US (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-05-03/news/900205075...>) if Quebec were to leave. Saskatchewan in both 1980 and 1995 evaluated the possibility of also seceding, and/or seeking US statehood (http://web.archive.org/web/20140829140952/http://www.thestar...>), on the event of a "Yes" vote in the Quebec referendum those years, in part because "Atlantic Canada would be 'an island'". It would only have been prudent for some or all of the other provincial governments to have made similar plans in secret.

>It would be extremely politically distasteful in Alberta to cede to the USA, such a plan would be political suicide.

Are you so sure about that, after the last few years of Alberta/Trudeau 2.0 conflicts fueling the longstanding sense of Western alienation? Remember, Re Secession lays out a legal path for secession.

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#104

Post by GnarfGnarf »

jpambrun wrote: post #53
GnarfGnarf wrote: post #31

As a Québecois, I have a theory about séparatisme : it is a clever ploy to get both levels of government to pander to Québec. The Federal and Provincial governments are always trying to outdo each other with concessions, largesse and favourable treatment. Québec should not separate because the Sûreté du Québec (Provincial Police) are voyous (bums). Personally I would not want to live in a land where I could not call…

Have you ever been to the rockys? I have herd this argument before.. I really can't understand it..

Well yes... I have been to the Rockies. That's why I am proud of them.

I lived three years in Alberta. I skied at Fortress, Sunshine, hills so long they cross provinces. The mountains are magnificent, awe-inspiring.

I now live in the Maritimes. Stan Rogers' Mary Ellen Carter is one of the greatest songs ever written :o)

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#105

Post by elevaet »

TMWNN wrote: post #103
elevaet wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Governor of Alberta at the time had planned to cede to the US Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US". It would be extremely politically distasteful in Alberta to cede to the USA, such a plan would be political suicide. There have definitely been fringe movements for Albertan Separatism though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_separatism > Governor Premier. Premier lead…

>Ex-Albertan here: this is false, there has never been a plan to "cede to the US". In 1990 the premier of Nova Scotia said that Atlantic Canada would have "no choice" but to join the US ( http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-05-03/news/900205075... >) if Quebec were to leave. Saskatchewan in both 1980 and 1995 evaluated the possibility of also seceding, and/or seeking US statehood ( http://web.archive.org/web/2014…

Yeah I'm sure about that. I mean never say never, but I would place a heavy wager on Alberta not ceding to the USA in the next 100 years. You're right that there is a strong anti-Trudeau, anti-Federal sentiment in the province, but that in no way implies a greater desire to be a part of the USA than Canada.

Independence, and a union of the 3 prairie provinces into a separate nation? There's a slim possibility. A state in the US? No way.

Re: Quebec Sovereignty Movement

#106

Post by snapplebobapple »

johnasmith wrote: post #3

I'm Québécois from birth (Trois Rivières). I voted in the incredibly close '95 seperation referendum. In my view, separation or sovereignty would be bad for us. Separation is mainly predicated on the idea that Québécois are culturally distinct from the rest of Canada, and that our values would be better represented independently. We mostly speak French, and the rest of Canada is predominantly anglo (my New Brunswick…

Do you think the current crop at the top of the current separatist movement really wants to leave or do you think they are just stoking tension to maintain the crazy subsidy program we have had in place for the last several decades in the face of increasing western objection to the large transfer to Quebec (and several other provinces, most notably the maritimes and territories) and the strengthening separatist movement in the prairies driven by these transfers? Or alternatively, in conjunction with the above do you think it's tension stoking to try to maintain their seats in parliament rather than the slow decline of Quebec federal power as population shifts west? Or is it none of the above and the guys running the show over there really do think it's a good idea to leave?
Post reply on HN