Anglo Society of New Brunswick Fallout
Menu
News
About Us
Useful Links
Privacy Policy
Photo Albums
Recommended Reading
Fund Raising Items For Sale
Contacting Us and Become a Member
A Synopsis of "Bilingual Today, French Tomorrow"

Log In
Username

Password

Remember Me



Search

Any term All terms

Archives
Letter #1
Letter #2
Letter #3
Letter #4
Letter #5
Letter #6
Letter #7
Letter #8

Calendar
May, 2013
S M T W T F S
28 29 30 01 02 03 04
05 06 07 08 09 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31


Letters That Tell It All
How is Your Math???
Sensible Solutions for New Brunswick's Staggering Debt
WHY ON EARTH ARE MORE FAMILIES USING FOOD BANKS IN NB?
He Can Serve in a War Zone but Not Work Here
"Political Correctness Will Be Our Demise"
Francophone Minority Stack the Deck Against English Majority

Why Are These Letters Rejected?
Support The Fight Against Quebec's Unconstitutional Bill 101
Will Health Care In English Continue To Exist?
Quebec Has It Right
A Taboo Subject

On the Way To The Press
Lawyer Upset that Crown Won't Translate French Documents
Time for Small Villages to Unite
A Warning to NB Taxpayers and Businesses

Quebec actively interfering in the affairs of other provinces
Article as published in the "Dialogue Magazine" Vol 21, No.2 Aug/Sept 2007

Views expressed by individuals in these letters are not necessarily the views of the Anglo Society of New Brunswick

Goodbye, so long, auf wiedersehen, goodbye
by Michael Neilly (email: fifth_columnist@magma.ca)


This will probably be my last Dialogue magazine column on Quebec. For one thing, so many people write so ably and eloquently on the topic that there is little that I could add. For another, I’m sick of what the Quebec “thing” has cost Canada in general. The biggest problems that Canada faces today are globalization, social decay and pollution; yet for decades, we have been distracted by Quebec’s puffed up, fascist politicians, who are determined to goose-step over basic democratic and constitutionally-guaranteed human rights to get what, they will find, will bring them little satisfaction.

A headline in the Nov. 8/06 Ottawa Citizen read, “Quebec to promote French from coast to coast”. “We have a responsibility with regard to who we are and to what constitutes the Quebec nation”, proclaimed Mr. Charest, unveiling his new policy on francophone Canada, stating further that “the active defence and promotion of Quebec’s interests and identity within Canada is closely linked to the narrow co-operation with francophone communities.” In other words, Quebec intends to support and defend (or meddle in) francophone minority communities across Canada, as does the federal government right now.

With this latest announcement, Quebec’s naked nationalist aspirations are reminiscent of Serbia’s longing for a Greater Serbia and one can easily draw parallels between Canada and the old Yugoslavia, both socialist countries with multicultural societies, both with one aggressive province bent on defending minority communities in the other provinces. Quebec’s talk of independence is one thing, but actively interfering in the affairs of other provinces, this is something entirely different.

This interference is a natural evolution of Quebec nationalism, which, for some naïve souls, means strictly focusing on if, how and when the province of Quebec will separate. Experts say, for instance, that Quebec has no "right" to separate, since there is no mechanism to do this in our constitution. However, I think separation will happen, among other nasty things, but not in the way people think.

Let me say that joining a federation is like signing a marriage contract. Simply because a marriage contract itself does not contain a “mechanism” to dissolve the marriage, that doesn’t mean that you can’t get a divorce! Theoretically, Quebec’s secession could occur with either negotiations prior to separation or a “spontaneous” Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) with negotiations afterwards.

However, there will never be a negotiated separation for two reasons: First, no Canadian Prime Minister wishes to go down in the history books as being the one who negotiated the breakup of Canada. Second, the separatists won’t negotiate either because, were they to negotiate up front, the true costs of Quebec's separation would at last be known to all Quebecers. These costs would be enormous: Canadian Forces bases, equipment and personnel, post office, central bank, currency and its valuation, real estate values, Western Quebecer’s access to jobs, especially government jobs, in Ottawa and Ontario in general, standard of living, Indian reserves, Employment Insurance, loss of territory, etc.

Therefore, discounting a negotiated separation, either separation will be announced one morning in a Unilateral Declaration of Independence and frantic negotiations will occur afterwards or attempts will be made to destabilize the federal government and precipitate the breakup of Canada. In either case, as with Yugoslavia (Serbia) and the USSR (Russia), a rump state will emerge, namely Greater Quebec, with or without the express permission of Quebecers. It will simply be done by those in power.

Over the decades, there haven’t been many nation states that declared UDI without the collapse of the mother state around it, again like Yugoslavia and the USSR. So, were I a separatist strategist or a fan of a Greater Quebec, I would certainly encourage dissent and political instability in Canada proper using, say, our divide and conquer Charter, multiculturalism, the environista movement, etc. The Liberal party, intentionally or otherwise, has been quite instrumental in weakening English Canada along these lines. At the same time Quebec’s culture and language “purity” is maintained through Law 101 and selective immigration from French-speaking countries.

Charest’s fascist proclamations raise another disturbing possibility, annexation. Again mindful of the breakup of Yugoslavia, watch for Quebec’s annexation of New Brunswick in addition to UDI, to “rescue” the second largest concentration of francophones in Canada, the Acadian French, from “assimilation”. It would be a mistake to think that Quebec’s pacifist posturing with respect to world events translates into pacifism in its own “backyard”, rather a manifest destiny almost totally unobstructed by sleepy Canada. With few Canadian troops to speak of east of Quebec save for the Royal Canadian Regiment, which I predict will be mysteriously confined to their barracks during the whole event, and the only route to New Brunswick for Western Canadian tanks and troops through the Quebec “nation”, it would be quite easy for Quebec to annex that province with little interference from the rest of Canada.

But wait, there’s more! Imagine that you are separatists planning independence. Would you accept the risk of a diminished Quebec, minus all the territory you gained since confederation, with a debased currency, no government jobs, a ruined housing market, flight of capital, etc., as you would expect with pure separation? Or would you prefer annexation of not only New Brunswick, but also Ontario? This would allow you to keep the Canadian dollar, preserve government jobs, a banking system, postal system and armed forces. You would get some very nice parliament buildings, too! In fact, Quebec is already taking Ontario by stealth. Useful idiot provincial Premier Dalton McGuinty has already appointed an Official Languages Commissioner and is seriously considering Official Bilingualism for Ontario. In Eastern Ontario, we are building segregated, French-only clinics, schools and community centres " the puffed-up politician’s siren call of purity is hard to resist. Ontario is the linchpin and once it is removed, Canada, as we know it (the Upper Canada run by Eastern robber barons anyway) falls et voilà, Greater Quebec.

I think that the average Quebecer, like the average Canadian, has little to do with the elites that run our respective governments and has, in effect, gone along for the ride. This inaction, apathy, or “delirious abandonment” will have serious consequences down the road for all concerned and the spontaneous goodwill seen from Canadians in 1995 during the last referendum has all but gone.

Considering all of the above, wouldn’t you rather negotiate terms now, if only to underscore the real cost of separation. It would be very powerful to set a separation date with a “separation” clock, like the Doomsday clock, to countdown to secession. So let’s just say good-bye now and remain friends, shall we? Enough with the maudlin hearts and minds campaigns that culminated in the sponsorship scandal, the buses to Montreal and the saccharine “gosh, if only we Anglos spoke French, we could all get along” mantra. Write the whole experience off now as the cost of our monstrous apathy and incredible wishful thinking.

Alert readers will remember that I did say earlier in this piece that there would never be a negotiated separation - by politicians. But considering the alternatives I’ve just described, we, the common people, should at least try. Quebec will still be there in the morning, in one shape or another, just as there is a Serbia and Russia. After all, a nation is more than its puffed-up politicians or lines on a map. It’s a state of mind. Let’s try using that mind.


10/01/2007 10:45 AM  Printable Version