quebec and language politics
This preview shows pages 1-2. to view the full 6 pages of the document.
feb. 8, 2011 pol214
Feb 14 11-2PM ss 2012 intership in political science firstname.lastname@example.org SS
Trajectory of Quebec Nationalism
2. constitutional landmarks (7)
3. Historical landmarks (9)
4. Ideological evolution (3)
*regionalism- test question: 5 immigrant waves to Canada
economically and culturally and politically. should senate be abolished. should senate be elected?
alberta vs. quebec. differences towards the senate? 1. number of seats. alberta.. not just elected. now
only has 6. another reason is elect senate.... certain legitimacy. represent regions. senators elected from
quebec be at odds with provincial government.
Identity- realtes to culture.
ex. canadian? Ontarian? Equally? equally but which first ontario or canadian?
QuebecÕh Ùí?"*, only 7% said i think as myself as canadian first. 1% said canadian.
among francs, only 1% said they were canadian. 70% quebec only/first. former GG thought she said she
was quebec first and then canadian second.
similar poll 2 years ago. 59% thought themselves as quebcers only. numbers went up. emotional ties
are not strong among quebec francs. makes up 80% of quebec. among the anglophones, 2% thinks of
them as quebec only. 45% thinks as canadian first and foremost. 20% said equal. 18% canadian only. 19%
think of themselves as quebecers first. break down the data, these identity are strongest among youth.
old people over 65 also have strong identification than the young who are higher than the old. this
suggest that over time, new young will come along and will get stronger and detachments will be
ex. quebec had a referendum. soverignty association. (seperatism) 1980 and 1995. as time go by, these
young people will soverignty and new young ppl are going to vote for soverignty. 30 years after the ref
and we see attitude dont follow. young ppl will change their thoughts because they become more
conservative. socalization. why is there not growing support for seperatism? becuse of political climate.
2. consituional landmarks
Only pages 1-2 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.
looping back to some of the things in the first term in the constitutional act. historically...
1. royal proclomation (1763)
2. Quebec act 1774
3. constitutional act 1791
4. union act 1791
5. confederation 1867
6. Constitution act 1982
7. secession reference 1998
quebec came to see canada was a solid pack between 2 distinct cultures. there was an understanding
that each sid would have veto on any unilateral changes. implicit veto of the nature of the constitution.
french canadian as a two founding nations, this stresses group rights. define by lanugae culture,
religion, tradition, etc. englihs canadians had differnt views. they were more weary of group rights. more
as classical federalism. its a matter of equal provinces. provincial rights, equality of equal and equaltiy
of individuals. these are different views. respect to democracy, views were queit different. english and
french review democracy differently. english view was if a problem happen, there are resolutions.
french was having a grand legal design. constitution with abstract social goals. deals with personal right.
view of the pierre trudeua. much more the british approach. dont write out the constitution. work your
way through it. refer to most important years, that 1759 and 1959. historical landmark. defeat of the
french on the plains of abraham. montcalm lost to wolfe. 1959, death of murice duplise. the queit
revolution was a leash.
1. its a direct product of treaty of paris. brti and france who gave up territories. now that the brit was in
charge of the northern part of BNA, crown issued a RP. its refered as a constituional act. along from it,
reproduced to aboringinals. it estalblished british soverignty. RP provided for rep legislature, prodivded
ppl to get elected and not acted on because 60-90 thousand french canadians. only at the time 600
anglophones/merchants and under brit law, only protestants could vote and appointed to the gov.
positions. (crown, judge, cabinets) legialstive assembly, only 600 vote? didnt make sense. today, there
are over 6million canadians in quebec. at the time 1/2 million BNAmeriacans. at that time, french as part
of north america made up 1% of the population. 2% now. they didnt grown proportionally. under this RP,
although provision, it didnt take place and brit also thought that there were now uncomfrotable,
because americans were being troublesom for them. official policy of the brit was assimilation. brti
needed the french in case theres goign to be a revolt in the southern collonies 1774, brit passed quebec
act. this is the first peice of legislation that applies to canada. it was simiply under the royal corwn
before, now, it applies to all of canada. extended boundaries of quebec. and also **freedom of worship
for roamn catholics. they could actually be appointed to governmnet. lesgialtive council was appointed.
(upper house). one of the reason there wassnt a lower house because french canadians idnt want one.
they saw whats going on in southern colonies... turn around and tax you... but the most significant act,
roman catholics are free and coulduse civil law (codified in proviate relations ex. marriage, spouses, not
controlled by english common law) criminal law however was under englsih common law. it contributed
keeping quebec the french canadians from staying loyal. american revolution. its the constituional act of
You're Reading a Preview
Unlock to view full version