Did I Write The Original Draft Of The Quebecois Nation Motion?
This is pretty strange folks.
On October 27th, I wrote a post titled "Why Don't We Just Go With Something Like This". In it, I reworked a provision of the 1995 Distinct Society resolution, and this is what I came with:
Which is remakably similar to the Harper motion.
I should say, that the "Why Don't We" post was intended to illustrate that such resolutions, have had little or no effect on combating separatism, in the past. The separtists will always complain that it's not enough and Quebec needs (read: wants) more powers, as has proven to be the case now. But there was no way of anticipating that the Bloc would ever actually support such a motion. And their voting in favour of the current motion, may turn out to be a powerful (rhetorical) tool in the fight against separatism. (Of course, they believe it will work in their favour. I'll have more on that later today or tomorrow.)
So, I guess the question is: Did a lowly Liberal blogger unintentionally alter the course of Canadian history? We may never know ....
UPDATE: Wow! Talk about rhetoric ...
UPDATE: Now that I think of it, this is the second time something like this has happened. On December 22, 2005, in post titled "Bullets And Iceburgs", I wrote:
Come January, the Conservatives unveiled their "5 priorities". Spooky!
Note to Liberal Party HQ: I'm available. :-)
On October 27th, I wrote a post titled "Why Don't We Just Go With Something Like This". In it, I reworked a provision of the 1995 Distinct Society resolution, and this is what I came with:
The House recognize that Quebec is a sociological nation within Canada.
Which is remakably similar to the Harper motion.
That this House recognize that the Quebecois form a nation within a united Canada.
I should say, that the "Why Don't We" post was intended to illustrate that such resolutions, have had little or no effect on combating separatism, in the past. The separtists will always complain that it's not enough and Quebec needs (read: wants) more powers, as has proven to be the case now. But there was no way of anticipating that the Bloc would ever actually support such a motion. And their voting in favour of the current motion, may turn out to be a powerful (rhetorical) tool in the fight against separatism. (Of course, they believe it will work in their favour. I'll have more on that later today or tomorrow.)
So, I guess the question is: Did a lowly Liberal blogger unintentionally alter the course of Canadian history? We may never know ....
UPDATE: Wow! Talk about rhetoric ...
UPDATE: Now that I think of it, this is the second time something like this has happened. On December 22, 2005, in post titled "Bullets And Iceburgs", I wrote:
The Liberal campaign lacks focus. I support them completely but for reasons of my own. I should be able to point to four or five (positive) things Martin is saying over and over, to justify my support. But the Liberal campaign message is muddled.
Come January, the Conservatives unveiled their "5 priorities". Spooky!
Note to Liberal Party HQ: I'm available. :-)
posted by Peter Wrightwater at
10:15 AM
6 Comments:
This world needs more countries like Canada that can reconcile different nationalities and can live peacefully and harmoniously together
Pure gold, Im afraid to say.
anon,
I changed "propaganda" to "rhetoric". I should have realized that the former could be construed as purely negative, which was not my intention.
Well played. Very close to the original
Nah, the problem with your original 'draft' is it still said Quebec. Quebec is a political unit. Quebecois is an ethnic/sociological nation - pure laine as it were (even more so than Quebecker, which still refers to people from Quebec).
That his can be used to support both sides in rhetoric, depending on interpretations of words goes to show how awful it was to bring up in the first place.
Kyle,
As I said, my original post was not meant to be taken seriously (and neither was this one really). It was meant to point out that resolutions like this one have not worked in the past.
And I agree with you, that if it weren't for a certain interloper, we would not be discussing this at all right now, which would be fine with me.
Hopefully, the Liberal Party delegates will soon put an end to his civic mischief.
Yes, hopefully.
And FYI, I proposed using the phrase "Quebecois" to defuse the problem two weeks ago in my blog! I still haven't figured out who I stole the idea from...
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home