To Post a Comment
Please wait a few seconds for the comments to load at the bottom of this page. Then read the ideas other people have shared and reply or add your own knowledge. The space for comments is in a pale font. It’s good to give your comment a title by selecting it and clicking the “B” (for “boldface”). And you can italicize passages with the “I”, indent, add hyperlinks (with the chain symbol) or even attach a photo or graphic from your hard drive by clicking the paperclip at the right side of the space. Have fun with it!
There’s a bit more nuance regarding Pierre Trudeau’s views on Quebec as a nation versus since. Trudeau particularly opposed Quebec being defined as a “distinct society”, which truly was a meaningless term — distinct as compared to whom? If Quebec was distinct, were not others? What was agreed since in Parliament during Harper’s reign was “That this House recognize that the Québécois form a nation within a united Canada.” Problematic is that Quebecois are seen by many to be only the francophone portion of Quebec and not all. So in terms of a Quebec “nation”, that appears to define the place by ethnicity and not residence. “Within a united Canada” further disrupts the argument for “distinct” status. It may not “refute” Pierre Trudeau’s critique but may underline its validity. Is Quebec a nation? If those who live there want it so — that’s the easiest way of looking at it. It’s an “imagined community” as are many others, large and small. A nation need not have a territorial status, but it usually does if a nation state. This has certain application to Israel/Palestine too. While Israelis have a nation state, Palestinians are waiting for theirs even though they inhabit definable territory.