Aucune réponse, en n'importe quelle langue
Today Michael Ignatieff had op-eds published in both languages (G&M and La Presse) where he 'clarifies' his position on the nation of Quebec.
He tries to be clear that he is - undoubtedly for pragmatic purposes - against any constitutional entrenchment of a 'fact'. What is he is still still unclear on is how the resolution that came out of his campaign would affect ethnic and linguistic anglos and allophones dans la Belle Province. I have asked his blog patrol this question several times and I've gotten no answer. Not even spin. So, again I must ask Team Iggy: How does Iggy's view of the civic/social/fiscal/spiritual/numinous nation he refers to affect Quebec Anglos and Allophones - or 'New Canadians' in ROC. If you have no response - which you clearly do not - you should look into who designed the policy proposal; question whether anyone clearly understood the demographics at play (i.e. Anglos in Qc; Anglos and allophones prevalance within the Liberal Party Canada - Quebec)
In addition to littering Canadian mailboxes with non-recycled paper product (bad Iggy!), his Quebec Team has also conveniently avoided demographic realities. In short, the Iggy campaign was happy to learn that as a delegate from a Montreal riding, I would be attending convention. They were less than thrilled to hear what I had to say about my perception about their campaign's perception about the Quebec 'reality' and the foul treatment of Mm. Dion et Rae in our fair city on 21 Oct.
All that to say: I'm still extremely interested in hearing an explanation from team Iggy about how this will affect the 1 million people in Qc who identified themselves during the last census as 'English Canadian' and the other countless people who are 'allophone' Quebecer/ Canadian. Tell me a story about the Charter, Iggy. But don't forget the notwithstanding clause.
posted by Sinestra @ 8:37 p.m.
3 comments
3 Comments:
The thoughts that you leave in your blog entry certainly tells us one thing: laws on multi-culturalism must be abolished at all cost, because many French and English Canadians are not eager to consider the ethnic minorities as Canadians.
By the way, even though I proudly identify myself as a "Canadian", I also know some people from ethnic minorities who proudly consider themselves as "Quebecker". To be very honest with you, the reason why Quebec must not be considered as a nation, it's because Quebec doesn't possess the fundamental component of a nation (i.e. a central government).
Anyway, here's the piece that I wrote about what makes a nation and why Quebec presently is not a nation:
Ignatieff's lack of judgement
They have no answer. Neither will they answer the question of weather or not Newfoundland is a nation within Canada or one of the founding nations, which it most certainly is, perhaps even moreso than Quebec. All they are doing is political pandering. They don't even believe the nation concept themselves.
anh khoi do: I mentioned allophones, the québécois term for those who use neither English nor French as a first lanfuage. Most New Canadians in Quebec consider themselves Quebecers; those that speak of the 'nation' tend to exclude allophones and anglophones from the idea of nation.
Post a Comment
<< Home