Historic low for Liberals as the CAQ wins majority in Quebec
October 2, 2018 8:58 AM Subscribe
With the sovereignty question largely off the table in this election, the Quebec Liberal Party was ousted as the ruling party in Quebec, with historically low numbers, while the Coalition Avenir Québec formed their first government, a majority. Along the way, Québec Solidaire gained 7 more seats, bringing them to the cusp of official party status (10 seats and 12 are required) while the Parti Québécois dropped from 28 seats to 9, losing official party status and their leader, Jean-François Lisée, lost his seat and resigned from his leadership position.
Results Map, clearly showing how the CAQ chipped away support from both the Liberals as well as the Parti Québécois, though only snagging two ridings on the island of Montreal. Of particular interest is the fact that they essentially decimated Liberal support in the Eastern Townships and that Québec Solidaire won in Sherbrooke, the riding that used to belong to former premier Jean Charest.
What happens now?
Results Map, clearly showing how the CAQ chipped away support from both the Liberals as well as the Parti Québécois, though only snagging two ridings on the island of Montreal. Of particular interest is the fact that they essentially decimated Liberal support in the Eastern Townships and that Québec Solidaire won in Sherbrooke, the riding that used to belong to former premier Jean Charest.
What happens now?
“The CAQ, which promises to lower taxes, privatize some aspects of the health-care system and cut the number of immigrants, capitalized on an appetite for change among Quebec voters.”
Oh
“Québec Solidaire won 10 ridings, more than tripling its seat count. Québec Solidaire's platform, which includes a series of bold environmental proposals, is particularly popular among young voters.”
..oh
posted by The Whelk at 9:11 AM on October 2, 2018 [10 favorites]
Oh
“Québec Solidaire won 10 ridings, more than tripling its seat count. Québec Solidaire's platform, which includes a series of bold environmental proposals, is particularly popular among young voters.”
..oh
posted by The Whelk at 9:11 AM on October 2, 2018 [10 favorites]
The center cannot hold.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:15 AM on October 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
posted by Chrysostom at 9:15 AM on October 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
Another unassailable majority obtained with only thirty-something percent of the vote, in the grand tradition of Canadian politics.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:16 AM on October 2, 2018 [17 favorites]
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:16 AM on October 2, 2018 [17 favorites]
The CAQ won only a single riding on the island of Montreal, Pointe-aux-Trembles, at the eastern end, an area that's essentially suburbia. (I know someone who grew up there.) Thus there's a sharp urban/suburban-rural divide, with tolerant, multicultural Montreal objecting to the xenophobic aspects of the CAQ platform.
posted by Philofacts at 9:22 AM on October 2, 2018 [11 favorites]
posted by Philofacts at 9:22 AM on October 2, 2018 [11 favorites]
Low voter turnout had a lot to do with the CAQ victory, yes.
posted by Philofacts at 9:23 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Philofacts at 9:23 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
The acronym has shades of the Canadian Reform-Alliance Party.
posted by clawsoon at 9:28 AM on October 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by clawsoon at 9:28 AM on October 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
I'd really appreciate a read on the CAQ from some Quebecers (or people who are just very familiar with Quebec politics). My instinct is to lump them in with the rightwing/nativist lurch of the western world, but calling them outright populist seems reductive.
posted by Alex404 at 9:30 AM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by Alex404 at 9:30 AM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Secret Sparrow - They were only founded in 2011. Honestly, I barely had any idea who they were because I am a staunch federalist and François Legault was a Parti Québécois cabinet minister, so I don't trust him on that basis alone. Then I read up on the platform and was like hell no. But they're apparently popular enough off the island of Montreal to win a majority...
The Whelk - Yeah, I view this election as a continuation of the anti-immigrant/racist sentiment that we've seen in the US with Trump and in Ontario with Ford. And, honestly, if Québec Solidaire weren't separatists, I would have voted for them and I suspect a lot of centre-left anglophones would have, too. I like the majority of their platform, but I will not ever vote for a party that believes Quebec should be its own country.
The Card Cheat & Philofacts - completely agree, it's the second-lowest turnout in the last 45 years or something like that. And, as a note, Bourget is on the island, so that's two ridings in Montreal that went to the CAQ.
Alex404 - As an anglo, I don't know a whole lot about them because they never had a chance of getting my vote, but I do view them as a nationalistic party with xenophobic tendencies. Among other things, their platform includes reducing immigration, forcing immigrants to pass a language and values test and going further than current policies about religious accommodations/face-coverings (which are, IMHO, already stupid). More info.
posted by juliebug at 9:38 AM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
The Whelk - Yeah, I view this election as a continuation of the anti-immigrant/racist sentiment that we've seen in the US with Trump and in Ontario with Ford. And, honestly, if Québec Solidaire weren't separatists, I would have voted for them and I suspect a lot of centre-left anglophones would have, too. I like the majority of their platform, but I will not ever vote for a party that believes Quebec should be its own country.
The Card Cheat & Philofacts - completely agree, it's the second-lowest turnout in the last 45 years or something like that. And, as a note, Bourget is on the island, so that's two ridings in Montreal that went to the CAQ.
Alex404 - As an anglo, I don't know a whole lot about them because they never had a chance of getting my vote, but I do view them as a nationalistic party with xenophobic tendencies. Among other things, their platform includes reducing immigration, forcing immigrants to pass a language and values test and going further than current policies about religious accommodations/face-coverings (which are, IMHO, already stupid). More info.
posted by juliebug at 9:38 AM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
> Another unassailable majority obtained with only thirty-something percent of the vote, in the grand tradition of Canadian politics.
Increasingly a trait of first-past-the-post politics in the western world generally, as conservative parties have been consulting with each other on how to game their respective election systems.
posted by at by at 9:38 AM on October 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
Increasingly a trait of first-past-the-post politics in the western world generally, as conservative parties have been consulting with each other on how to game their respective election systems.
posted by at by at 9:38 AM on October 2, 2018 [8 favorites]
It is pretty amazing that in my lifetime entire major Quebec political parties have been formed and then quite nearly dissolved.
posted by GuyZero at 9:41 AM on October 2, 2018 [7 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 9:41 AM on October 2, 2018 [7 favorites]
how to game their respective election systems.
Democracy was a great experiment. I'm glad I lived in a time when it was available for some of the time. I'll miss it.
posted by Fizz at 9:49 AM on October 2, 2018 [12 favorites]
Democracy was a great experiment. I'm glad I lived in a time when it was available for some of the time. I'll miss it.
posted by Fizz at 9:49 AM on October 2, 2018 [12 favorites]
ADQ, I hardly knew ye.
posted by clawsoon at 9:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by clawsoon at 9:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Alack, CAQ will attack SAQ, tabernac!
posted by Kabanos at 9:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [20 favorites]
posted by Kabanos at 9:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [20 favorites]
Another Quebec Anglo here -- so far, I have especially liked this brief analysis. It really does feel like the sovereignist-federalist divide has given way to a more conventional left-right divide, with the PQ, who have been the standard bearers for sovereignty since the movement began, effectively dissolving into left and right sovereignist parties (Québec Solidaire and CAQ, respectively) with the Liberals in between.
It has been depressing to find out how actually conservative Quebec is, though. I came here for the socialism! But if the PQ don't recover from this, and I doubt they will, I am excited for the possibility of Québec Solidaire growing into the space they occupied. They ran on an unabashedly progressive platform and if there is anything to be optimistic about, it's that.
posted by spindle at 10:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
It has been depressing to find out how actually conservative Quebec is, though. I came here for the socialism! But if the PQ don't recover from this, and I doubt they will, I am excited for the possibility of Québec Solidaire growing into the space they occupied. They ran on an unabashedly progressive platform and if there is anything to be optimistic about, it's that.
posted by spindle at 10:51 AM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
It has been depressing to find out how actually conservative Quebec is
The separatists have more of a European style right wing. Anti-Muslim/anti-immigrant voters who are fine paying the taxes required for e.g. universal $10/day daycare.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:14 AM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
The separatists have more of a European style right wing. Anti-Muslim/anti-immigrant voters who are fine paying the taxes required for e.g. universal $10/day daycare.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:14 AM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
The liberals were truly despised at this point after 15 years of almost continuous control of government, numerous corruption scandals and a period of austerity mesures that was really impopular. If you're blaming problems on a pre-2000 PQ government you're giving confidence you'll fix the issues. I don't think the CAQ will but they have the advantage of not being named the liberal party, because they're very similar + identity gimmicks.
Also if you're not voting for QS because of the sovereignty thing you might be doing it wrong, this is a left/progressive party way way way more than it's a nationalist party. It might be harder to parse if you don't follow the french media, but you can feel that they don't intend to walk the talk on that.
At this point I'm pining my hopes on Legault actually following through his promise to switch the system to a mixed proportional one. It's not in their current best interest since they won a majority of seats with a minority of the vote but theyre still signaling they'll go through with it. And Legault has a lot of flaws but he's not a Doug Ford.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:29 AM on October 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
Also if you're not voting for QS because of the sovereignty thing you might be doing it wrong, this is a left/progressive party way way way more than it's a nationalist party. It might be harder to parse if you don't follow the french media, but you can feel that they don't intend to walk the talk on that.
At this point I'm pining my hopes on Legault actually following through his promise to switch the system to a mixed proportional one. It's not in their current best interest since they won a majority of seats with a minority of the vote but theyre still signaling they'll go through with it. And Legault has a lot of flaws but he's not a Doug Ford.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 11:29 AM on October 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
François Legault would invoke notwithstanding clause to ban hijabs from civil service
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:30 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 11:30 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
To give a sense of the CAQ: They're threatening/announcing that they'll use the not-withstanding clause to force civil servants to not "display religious symbols". This mostly means hijabs, of course, but could equally affect Sikhs and Jews too. It is only for "garments" though, so those big fuck-off crosses some were wearting would be (appear to be) totes ok.
François Legault to invoke notwithstanding clause to ban some from wearing religious symbols
posted by bonehead at 11:32 AM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
François Legault to invoke notwithstanding clause to ban some from wearing religious symbols
posted by bonehead at 11:32 AM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
He also wants to cut immigration in half. Traditionally, Quebec has had an uphill climb with immigration and retention of new immigrants due to language requirements.
posted by bonehead at 11:34 AM on October 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by bonehead at 11:34 AM on October 2, 2018 [4 favorites]
I will not vote for a party with a unilingual website. I don't expect 100% translation, but if you don't have a basic bit of info in English, you obviously do not want my vote. So even if QS were not separatist, I would not voted for them. (I voted for the new NPDQ.)
Honestly, there was no good result -- I was hoping for a minority CAQ (because I wanted the Liberals out and no one else had a chance), but this is resounding majority. That said, Legault has repeated his promise for electoral reform -- which, hopefully, will include ridings having to have somewhere around the same population, mine has 52k while the smallest has about 11k, I'm not sure what the average is -- so that would be nice.
I'm neither surprised nor upset that Lisee is out.
posted by jeather at 11:35 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Honestly, there was no good result -- I was hoping for a minority CAQ (because I wanted the Liberals out and no one else had a chance), but this is resounding majority. That said, Legault has repeated his promise for electoral reform -- which, hopefully, will include ridings having to have somewhere around the same population, mine has 52k while the smallest has about 11k, I'm not sure what the average is -- so that would be nice.
I'm neither surprised nor upset that Lisee is out.
posted by jeather at 11:35 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
ALSO if you want to keep religious symbols off people with power it's time to get out the crucifix from the National Assembly thanks.
posted by jeather at 11:37 AM on October 2, 2018 [11 favorites]
posted by jeather at 11:37 AM on October 2, 2018 [11 favorites]
it's time to get out the crucifix from the National Assembly thanks
But where will Lagault go whenever someone talks about immigration?
posted by GuyZero at 11:54 AM on October 2, 2018
But where will Lagault go whenever someone talks about immigration?
posted by GuyZero at 11:54 AM on October 2, 2018
WaterAndPixels - Sorry, no party will ever have my vote, regardless of the rest of the platform, if one of their points is separation. My first vote was the 1995 referendum and that was too close for me. I'm more of a lefty than my traditional Liberal support shows, but for me, it's about keeping Quebec within Canada more than anything else. My mom's family has been here since the mid-1600s, and yet, because I'm more anglophone, I've been told by separatist francophones to get out, that this isn't my home, that this isn't the place for me, to go back to Ontario, where I've never lived. A party who would work to try to ensure my home is no longer part of Canada cannot be a party I would ever support.
jeather - Agreed, re: language and the minority government. I'd hoped that any kind of combination of MNAs could maybe bring the CAQ a little to the left. :/ I'm hoping electoral reform will not suck. I'm a fan of it in concept, but not sure what they're proposing, exactly, and am wary.
And the crucifix too. Eesh. This "secular state" is a load of garbage, since it targets those who don't have "traditionally Québecois" religious symbols. It reeks of xenophobia and prejudice and racism.
posted by juliebug at 11:59 AM on October 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
jeather - Agreed, re: language and the minority government. I'd hoped that any kind of combination of MNAs could maybe bring the CAQ a little to the left. :/ I'm hoping electoral reform will not suck. I'm a fan of it in concept, but not sure what they're proposing, exactly, and am wary.
And the crucifix too. Eesh. This "secular state" is a load of garbage, since it targets those who don't have "traditionally Québecois" religious symbols. It reeks of xenophobia and prejudice and racism.
posted by juliebug at 11:59 AM on October 2, 2018 [9 favorites]
Alack, CAQ will attack SAQ, tabernac!e
Some of you will be thrilled to know that CAQ candidates (and things pertaining to or of the CAQ) are referred to as "caquiste", like so:
Les contours du plan caquiste se définissaient au fur et à mesure que la campagne progressait. Dans la dernière portion du marathon, il avait affirmé que les nouveaux arrivants pourraient passer les tests « autant de fois qu'ils le veulent », jusqu'à ce qu'ils les réussissent.
Ontario anglo here FWIW, so feel free to correct the hell out of me, but it would seem there's a good chance that immigration will be another notwithstanding clause fight (more on Ontario's recent civics lesson on this here if you're a non-Canadian and curious about that there clause).
The La Presse article I linked above basically says that the federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Dominic LeBlanc and Justin Trudeau are staying mum on what Legault and the CAQ are proposing right now, sort of taking a wait-and-see approach until it becomes clear what Legault is actually going to do:
The CAQ started the 39-day campaign ahead in the polls, but saw its numbers dip during one crucial mid-campaign week between two leaders’ debates, during which Legault’s confounding comments on his immigration policies dominated the conversation.
Liberal Leader Philippe Couillard put forward that Legault’s stance on immigration had become the “ballot question” of the election. The CAQ fired back that the Liberals were running a fear campaign, but Legault continued to stumble over basic questions on the topic, revealing a lack of knowledge about the roles provincial and federal governments share in immigration.
Because Quebec's "immigration problem" is not that immigration is in itself a problem. Far from it. They need more of it to solve a problem: maintaining a francophone population.
He also wants to cut immigration in half. Traditionally, Quebec has had an uphill climb with immigration and retention of new immigrants due to language requirements.
So the larger cosmic joke's on Quebec's white francophone racists and xenophobes because the majority of the immigration they want and need is currently (and will continue to be from) francophonie countries that include the DRC, Morocco, Senegal, Haiti, and others. Long story short, in order to keep their francophone population steady, Quebec needs immigration that is nonwhite (and frequently non-Christian) owing to the countries from which those francophone immigrants come from. Cutting that in half would probably kickstart a steady and appreciable decline in the province's francophone population.
More on this from StatsCan:
French and the francophonie in Canada
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 12:01 PM on October 2, 2018 [14 favorites]
Some of you will be thrilled to know that CAQ candidates (and things pertaining to or of the CAQ) are referred to as "caquiste", like so:
Les contours du plan caquiste se définissaient au fur et à mesure que la campagne progressait. Dans la dernière portion du marathon, il avait affirmé que les nouveaux arrivants pourraient passer les tests « autant de fois qu'ils le veulent », jusqu'à ce qu'ils les réussissent.
Ontario anglo here FWIW, so feel free to correct the hell out of me, but it would seem there's a good chance that immigration will be another notwithstanding clause fight (more on Ontario's recent civics lesson on this here if you're a non-Canadian and curious about that there clause).
The La Presse article I linked above basically says that the federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Dominic LeBlanc and Justin Trudeau are staying mum on what Legault and the CAQ are proposing right now, sort of taking a wait-and-see approach until it becomes clear what Legault is actually going to do:
The CAQ started the 39-day campaign ahead in the polls, but saw its numbers dip during one crucial mid-campaign week between two leaders’ debates, during which Legault’s confounding comments on his immigration policies dominated the conversation.
Liberal Leader Philippe Couillard put forward that Legault’s stance on immigration had become the “ballot question” of the election. The CAQ fired back that the Liberals were running a fear campaign, but Legault continued to stumble over basic questions on the topic, revealing a lack of knowledge about the roles provincial and federal governments share in immigration.
Because Quebec's "immigration problem" is not that immigration is in itself a problem. Far from it. They need more of it to solve a problem: maintaining a francophone population.
He also wants to cut immigration in half. Traditionally, Quebec has had an uphill climb with immigration and retention of new immigrants due to language requirements.
So the larger cosmic joke's on Quebec's white francophone racists and xenophobes because the majority of the immigration they want and need is currently (and will continue to be from) francophonie countries that include the DRC, Morocco, Senegal, Haiti, and others. Long story short, in order to keep their francophone population steady, Quebec needs immigration that is nonwhite (and frequently non-Christian) owing to the countries from which those francophone immigrants come from. Cutting that in half would probably kickstart a steady and appreciable decline in the province's francophone population.
More on this from StatsCan:
French and the francophonie in Canada
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 12:01 PM on October 2, 2018 [14 favorites]
for me, it's about keeping Quebec within Canada more than anything else.
Ah, nationalism. So insane.
posted by the agents of KAOS at 12:04 PM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Ah, nationalism. So insane.
posted by the agents of KAOS at 12:04 PM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Yet another landslide win for a party with an anti-immigration platform... I'm not sure I like where this is all headed.
posted by Vindaloo at 12:11 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Vindaloo at 12:11 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
The ban on non-Christian religious symbols is personally frightening to me. I don't wear the hijab, but my colleague does and my husband wears a kippah. But it's more than that: it smacks so much of xenophobia, especially when paired with language around 'values' that I fear it's just the beginning.
My first reaction to this and to their immigration stance is to think that this means we'll just have more people moving to the rest of Canada (often to our benefit, as this 2013 ad shows). But not everyone is free to move and no one should have to move just to be able to exercise their freedom of religion.
As for 'values': I'm at the point where I only hear this as a dogwhistle to xenophobes and bigots. They never say WHAT values, WHOSE values. All I know is that whenever a right-wing politician starts talking about 'values', I know they are about to say or do something that is explicitly against what I thought were basic Canadian values of equity and toleration.
posted by jb at 12:14 PM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
My first reaction to this and to their immigration stance is to think that this means we'll just have more people moving to the rest of Canada (often to our benefit, as this 2013 ad shows). But not everyone is free to move and no one should have to move just to be able to exercise their freedom of religion.
As for 'values': I'm at the point where I only hear this as a dogwhistle to xenophobes and bigots. They never say WHAT values, WHOSE values. All I know is that whenever a right-wing politician starts talking about 'values', I know they are about to say or do something that is explicitly against what I thought were basic Canadian values of equity and toleration.
posted by jb at 12:14 PM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
I only hear this as a dogwhistle to xenophobes and bigots.
Oh, I don't think there's any dog left in this whistle.
posted by jeather at 12:15 PM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
Oh, I don't think there's any dog left in this whistle.
posted by jeather at 12:15 PM on October 2, 2018 [13 favorites]
The center cannot hold.
What about the idea that when voters can choose between two credible sovereigntist parties, one of them is bound to lose votes?
posted by JamesBay at 1:36 PM on October 2, 2018
What about the idea that when voters can choose between two credible sovereigntist parties, one of them is bound to lose votes?
posted by JamesBay at 1:36 PM on October 2, 2018
It has been depressing to find out how actually conservative QuebecEarth is
Just sayin...
posted by Thorzdad at 1:44 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Just sayin...
posted by Thorzdad at 1:44 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
> My response was "The who?"
I am with you. I know I have been ignoring Canadian politics for too long when I don't even recognize the names of two of the three parties in this election.
posted by rokusan at 1:50 PM on October 2, 2018
I am with you. I know I have been ignoring Canadian politics for too long when I don't even recognize the names of two of the three parties in this election.
posted by rokusan at 1:50 PM on October 2, 2018
And Legault has a lot of flaws but he's not a Doug Ford.
...yet. And Doug Ford is still in his larval stage.
posted by aeshnid at 1:53 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
...yet. And Doug Ford is still in his larval stage.
posted by aeshnid at 1:53 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Ready to hear about some elections not won by Nazis now TBH.
posted by Artw at 2:40 PM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by Artw at 2:40 PM on October 2, 2018 [6 favorites]
Oh, I don't think there's any dog left in this whistle.
Just the spectral hounds of Vichy France...
Marine Le Pen tweeted approval of Legault's immigration platform this morning:
Contrairement à ce que serinaient les libéraux immigrationnistes béats, les Québécois ont voté pour moins d’immigration. La lucidité et la fermeté face au défi migratoire est le point commun des élections de quasiment tous les pays du monde confrontés à cet enjeu. MLP #Québec
Basically this:
"Contrary to the smug recitations of liberal "immigrationists," Quebecers voted for less immigration. Lucidity and firmness in the face of the migratory challenge is the common thing at stake in elections in almost every country in the world confronted with this issue."
*spits*
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 3:28 PM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Just the spectral hounds of Vichy France...
Marine Le Pen tweeted approval of Legault's immigration platform this morning:
Contrairement à ce que serinaient les libéraux immigrationnistes béats, les Québécois ont voté pour moins d’immigration. La lucidité et la fermeté face au défi migratoire est le point commun des élections de quasiment tous les pays du monde confrontés à cet enjeu. MLP #Québec
Basically this:
"Contrary to the smug recitations of liberal "immigrationists," Quebecers voted for less immigration. Lucidity and firmness in the face of the migratory challenge is the common thing at stake in elections in almost every country in the world confronted with this issue."
*spits*
posted by mandolin conspiracy at 3:28 PM on October 2, 2018 [2 favorites]
Traditionally, Quebec has had an uphill climb with immigration and retention of new immigrants due to language requirements.
Well, it's not the immigrants they want to retain.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 3:55 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Well, it's not the immigrants they want to retain.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 3:55 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
The CAQ is the party of the nationalist Francophone bourgeoisie, looking for lower taxes and "business-friendly" policies. These people skew older and tend to live in mostly-white, mostly-French-speaking suburbs. They remember a time when Quebec, while multicultural, was mostly segregated, with Jewish people in the Mile-End, Italians in Saint-Léonard, Chinese people in Chinatown, Black people in Little Burgundy, and almost no immigrants outside of Montreal.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 4:01 PM on October 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 4:01 PM on October 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
It is pretty amazing that in my lifetime entire major Quebec political parties have been formed and then quite nearly dissolved.
That's how first-past-the-post is supposed to work. Coalition governments, where 5he coalition is formed before the election. When people trust each other enough to run candidates under one banner they win elections. When people distrust each other so much that they can't compromise on a platform and trust each other to implement it they form two parties, and lose lose lose until they find a way to live together. This is why Canada has gained or lost a major political party every ten years for the past century.
The Canadian right gets this. Reformers were willing to lose a decade's worth of elections until their policies had consensus support on the right, then ran to victory as a reunited party.
Liberals, Greens, NDP - their members distrust each other, and apparently care more about their mutual differences than they care about beating the Conservatives and making policy. A liberal-democratic party would rule Canada with an overwhelming majority in Parliament, if we on the left trusted each other.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 4:05 PM on October 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
That's how first-past-the-post is supposed to work. Coalition governments, where 5he coalition is formed before the election. When people trust each other enough to run candidates under one banner they win elections. When people distrust each other so much that they can't compromise on a platform and trust each other to implement it they form two parties, and lose lose lose until they find a way to live together. This is why Canada has gained or lost a major political party every ten years for the past century.
The Canadian right gets this. Reformers were willing to lose a decade's worth of elections until their policies had consensus support on the right, then ran to victory as a reunited party.
Liberals, Greens, NDP - their members distrust each other, and apparently care more about their mutual differences than they care about beating the Conservatives and making policy. A liberal-democratic party would rule Canada with an overwhelming majority in Parliament, if we on the left trusted each other.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 4:05 PM on October 2, 2018 [5 favorites]
A liberal-democratic party would rule Canada with an overwhelming majority in Parliament, if we on the left trusted each other.
Or if Liberals were trust-worthy.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 4:26 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Or if Liberals were trust-worthy.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 4:26 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
I voted for Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois of Québec solidaire and he won (not a huge surprise as we just elected him in a by-election less than two years ago). He was a leader in the student strikes (for tuition freeze) here a few years ago and then became co-leader of Québec solidaire and he is very progressive.
posted by phoque at 4:34 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by phoque at 4:34 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Liberals, Greens, NDP - their members distrust each other, and apparently care more about their mutual differences than they care about beating the Conservatives and making policy. A liberal-democratic party would rule Canada with an overwhelming majority in Parliament, if we on the left trusted each other.
Neither the Greens nor the Liberals are "left" in the same way that the NDP is "left." Here on Vancouver Island, a Green stronghold, if you take a look at the riding-by-riding results in the last provincial election, the Greens competed with the right-leaning BC Liberals (not the same as the federal Liberals) for vote share.
In every riding that the Greens won in BC, they did so at the expense of BC Liberal vote share. The NDP share of the vote stayed largely the same in those ridings compared to the previous election in 2012.
This is because the Green Party is largely a party of affluent suburbanites and professionals, and has little to offer the NDP base.
The federal Liberals are a centrist party who steal ideas from all parties. I'd argue that the federal Liberal political philosophy, especially under Justin Trudeau, is essentially pragmatic and opportunistic. They are not a left-wing or even a particularly progressive party.
Like, why should anyone on the Left trust the Liberals? Part of the problem is that the Justin Trudeau government has been pretty weak so far. There's nothing a left-leaning person can point at and say, "yes, I trust the Liberal candidate in my riding, I'm going to vote for them."
As for the Greens, they would rather install solar panels on a suburban roof than do anything meaningful to end child poverty, right now. And their stance on First Nations land rights is pathetic.
posted by JamesBay at 5:00 PM on October 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
Neither the Greens nor the Liberals are "left" in the same way that the NDP is "left." Here on Vancouver Island, a Green stronghold, if you take a look at the riding-by-riding results in the last provincial election, the Greens competed with the right-leaning BC Liberals (not the same as the federal Liberals) for vote share.
In every riding that the Greens won in BC, they did so at the expense of BC Liberal vote share. The NDP share of the vote stayed largely the same in those ridings compared to the previous election in 2012.
This is because the Green Party is largely a party of affluent suburbanites and professionals, and has little to offer the NDP base.
The federal Liberals are a centrist party who steal ideas from all parties. I'd argue that the federal Liberal political philosophy, especially under Justin Trudeau, is essentially pragmatic and opportunistic. They are not a left-wing or even a particularly progressive party.
Like, why should anyone on the Left trust the Liberals? Part of the problem is that the Justin Trudeau government has been pretty weak so far. There's nothing a left-leaning person can point at and say, "yes, I trust the Liberal candidate in my riding, I'm going to vote for them."
As for the Greens, they would rather install solar panels on a suburban roof than do anything meaningful to end child poverty, right now. And their stance on First Nations land rights is pathetic.
posted by JamesBay at 5:00 PM on October 2, 2018 [3 favorites]
Quebec Solidare has a fascinating set of arguments about indigenious soverginty, which is why i would vote for them. Also, for Canada, this seems to be a city/country problem--frankly, much like Toronto.
Also, I maintain that the nativism of Quebec's xenophobia is unique in Canada, refusing to intergrate the large Francaphonie population.
posted by PinkMoose at 7:08 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Also, I maintain that the nativism of Quebec's xenophobia is unique in Canada, refusing to intergrate the large Francaphonie population.
posted by PinkMoose at 7:08 PM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]
Ready to hear about some elections not won by Nazis now TBH.
That’s really up to left/liberal/progressive/socialist parties to learn how to suck less
posted by Apocryphon at 7:10 PM on October 2, 2018
That’s really up to left/liberal/progressive/socialist parties to learn how to suck less
posted by Apocryphon at 7:10 PM on October 2, 2018
I've had all sorts of odd conversations with separatist francophones (generally positive ones, but weird).
"Why do Jews speak English?" Because, when we got here, the French schools wouldn't let us attend. It's not like they came speaking either English or French, as a rule.
"Wow, your family has been here for that long?" YES longer than you recent Italian or Portuguese immigrants who are separatists thanks. (Not as long as juliebug's family.)
Divisions between leftist parties federally and provincially are quite different -- though I'd argue that neither the federal nor Quebec Liberals are particularly left, maybe vaguely left of centre when it's convenient. QS was the leftist party, PLQ the centrist, CAQ the right party, and PQ for "separation above all", I think. (The Greens and the NDP in this election were pretty similar and I would have voted for either.)
I think Legault is probably smart enough to know that FPTP math will not always help his party, which is why he currently supports it. But who knows. I think the lawsuit about riding sizes will be heard next year, too.
posted by jeather at 9:36 AM on October 3, 2018 [2 favorites]
"Why do Jews speak English?" Because, when we got here, the French schools wouldn't let us attend. It's not like they came speaking either English or French, as a rule.
"Wow, your family has been here for that long?" YES longer than you recent Italian or Portuguese immigrants who are separatists thanks. (Not as long as juliebug's family.)
Divisions between leftist parties federally and provincially are quite different -- though I'd argue that neither the federal nor Quebec Liberals are particularly left, maybe vaguely left of centre when it's convenient. QS was the leftist party, PLQ the centrist, CAQ the right party, and PQ for "separation above all", I think. (The Greens and the NDP in this election were pretty similar and I would have voted for either.)
I think Legault is probably smart enough to know that FPTP math will not always help his party, which is why he currently supports it. But who knows. I think the lawsuit about riding sizes will be heard next year, too.
posted by jeather at 9:36 AM on October 3, 2018 [2 favorites]
for me, it's about keeping Quebec within Canada more than anything else.
Ah, nationalism. So insane.
Do you think that wanting to stay within a diverse federal state rather than one defined on much narrower linguistic and cultural grounds is nationalist?
posted by atrazine at 6:16 AM on October 4, 2018 [1 favorite]
Ah, nationalism. So insane.
Do you think that wanting to stay within a diverse federal state rather than one defined on much narrower linguistic and cultural grounds is nationalist?
posted by atrazine at 6:16 AM on October 4, 2018 [1 favorite]
Do you think that wanting to stay within a diverse federal state rather than one defined on much narrower linguistic and cultural grounds is nationalist?
I don't know how you could possibly say that with a straight face, I guess maybe you were giggling as you wrote it. What I read was that not breaking up the existing nation-state was the most important goal of all, aka nationalism. I think you are imagining that someone made a convoluted attempt to pretend that voting for parties that are against immigration and cultural/racial diversity in general is somehow pro-diversity? When in fact, according to the argument presented, given a choice between Quebec as a monolingual white province of Canada and Quebec as a multilingual standalone nation with religious freedom, the monolingual non-diverse option would be better.
posted by the agents of KAOS at 1:25 PM on October 4, 2018
I don't know how you could possibly say that with a straight face, I guess maybe you were giggling as you wrote it. What I read was that not breaking up the existing nation-state was the most important goal of all, aka nationalism. I think you are imagining that someone made a convoluted attempt to pretend that voting for parties that are against immigration and cultural/racial diversity in general is somehow pro-diversity? When in fact, according to the argument presented, given a choice between Quebec as a monolingual white province of Canada and Quebec as a multilingual standalone nation with religious freedom, the monolingual non-diverse option would be better.
posted by the agents of KAOS at 1:25 PM on October 4, 2018
Maybe the assumption is that continued provincial status would let the federal government force Quebec to accommodate diversity, whereas an independent Quebec would allow nationalists to run unchecked.
posted by Apocryphon at 2:27 PM on October 4, 2018
posted by Apocryphon at 2:27 PM on October 4, 2018
not breaking up the existing nation-state was the most important goal of all, aka nationalism.
By this definition, the Scottish Nationalist Party is the biggest non-nationalist party in the UK HoC.
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 2:54 PM on October 4, 2018
By this definition, the Scottish Nationalist Party is the biggest non-nationalist party in the UK HoC.
posted by Freelance Demiurge at 2:54 PM on October 4, 2018
I'd argue that historically, racist and xenophobic policies were at least as much practiced by the Federal government as by the Quebec government.
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:44 PM on October 4, 2018
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 9:44 PM on October 4, 2018
What I read was that not breaking up the existing nation-state was the most important goal of all, aka nationalism.
Canada is not and never has been a nation state. Some people attempted to create a new, non-ethnic Canadian nationalism (Pearsonian Nationalism - which also makes me question: if it's non-ethnic, is it nationalism?). But I wouldn't have said that they succeeded. We're currently closest to a multinational state (by the list on the nation state wikipedia page), but as a settler-colony, that definition doesn't fit well (we're no Austro-Hungarian empire); multicultural is a bit better.
The UK isn't really a nation state, either. Maybe England was, in that brief period when it didn't claim any bit of Ireland (1500?). But it still had a bit of Calais - and, of course, 16th century states had no pretensions to being nation states (they'd happily rule anything, culture/language be damned). There was an attempt to create a British nationalism (Britons by Linda Colley is an excellent analysis of this), but it was always flawed (it couldn't incorporate Catholic Ireland) and had largely failed: while many people think of themselves as "British", I don't think that's felt as a 'nation' but rather as a 'citizen'. Their nation or ethnicity would still be English, Scottish, Welsh or (northern) Irish.
I hate nationalism. I think it's done so much harm in our world. I never want to live in a state or country which aims to be a nation state, united by language and culture, because the only way this ever happens is ethnic cleansing and genocide. No good has ever come of nationalism.
posted by jb at 8:10 AM on October 5, 2018 [1 favorite]
Canada is not and never has been a nation state. Some people attempted to create a new, non-ethnic Canadian nationalism (Pearsonian Nationalism - which also makes me question: if it's non-ethnic, is it nationalism?). But I wouldn't have said that they succeeded. We're currently closest to a multinational state (by the list on the nation state wikipedia page), but as a settler-colony, that definition doesn't fit well (we're no Austro-Hungarian empire); multicultural is a bit better.
The UK isn't really a nation state, either. Maybe England was, in that brief period when it didn't claim any bit of Ireland (1500?). But it still had a bit of Calais - and, of course, 16th century states had no pretensions to being nation states (they'd happily rule anything, culture/language be damned). There was an attempt to create a British nationalism (Britons by Linda Colley is an excellent analysis of this), but it was always flawed (it couldn't incorporate Catholic Ireland) and had largely failed: while many people think of themselves as "British", I don't think that's felt as a 'nation' but rather as a 'citizen'. Their nation or ethnicity would still be English, Scottish, Welsh or (northern) Irish.
I hate nationalism. I think it's done so much harm in our world. I never want to live in a state or country which aims to be a nation state, united by language and culture, because the only way this ever happens is ethnic cleansing and genocide. No good has ever come of nationalism.
posted by jb at 8:10 AM on October 5, 2018 [1 favorite]
What I read was that not breaking up the existing nation-state was the most important goal of all, aka nationalism.
If that was based on jingoistic motivations, i.e. non-ironic "Canada, fuck yeah" (I've never met a Canadian who was that kind of nationalist but there must be some), then of course yes that's nationalism. My reading of the original comment, and of most Canadian pro-federal anti separatist sentiment is that it is not based on any kind of mystical nation worshipping woo but instead on pragmatic geopolitical and economic arguments.
I actually see it as parallel to the arguments in Europe over the right balance of power between the EU and the nation states within it. The balance of power between provincial and federal governments in Canada is obviously different but a Canadian province has a lot more independence than a US state does, though less than a European state within the EU.
The pragmatic argument for larger states is really about international power politics, how would an independent Quebec stand up against the US considering how difficult that is for a united Canada?
Like a lot of people on Metafilter I am uncomfortable with the nation-state idea, where a country should correspond to a particular ethnic, or linguistic group while also recognising that certain regions, provinces, and states are home to groups that have been historically oppressed and who seek out sovereignty to break away from what they see as repressive and even imperialist states.
Scotland, Catalonia, Quebec they're all part of larger political entities that some of their people don't want to be part of any longer. There's a mix of motivations: differing political centres, historical grievances, etc.
These change over time as well, the Scottish Nationalist Party before the 1970s was a nationalist party in the traditional sense, derided as the "Tartan Tories" by Labour. Of course, modern Scottish Nationalism is much more about the Scottish political centre being further to the left than that of the whole of Great Britain, and mainstream Scottish independence is now a pluralistic movement.
I think you are imagining that someone made a convoluted attempt to pretend that voting for parties that are against immigration and cultural/racial diversity in general is somehow pro-diversity?
No, that would indeed be an extraordinary thing to imagine.
posted by atrazine at 3:05 AM on October 6, 2018
If that was based on jingoistic motivations, i.e. non-ironic "Canada, fuck yeah" (I've never met a Canadian who was that kind of nationalist but there must be some), then of course yes that's nationalism. My reading of the original comment, and of most Canadian pro-federal anti separatist sentiment is that it is not based on any kind of mystical nation worshipping woo but instead on pragmatic geopolitical and economic arguments.
I actually see it as parallel to the arguments in Europe over the right balance of power between the EU and the nation states within it. The balance of power between provincial and federal governments in Canada is obviously different but a Canadian province has a lot more independence than a US state does, though less than a European state within the EU.
The pragmatic argument for larger states is really about international power politics, how would an independent Quebec stand up against the US considering how difficult that is for a united Canada?
Like a lot of people on Metafilter I am uncomfortable with the nation-state idea, where a country should correspond to a particular ethnic, or linguistic group while also recognising that certain regions, provinces, and states are home to groups that have been historically oppressed and who seek out sovereignty to break away from what they see as repressive and even imperialist states.
Scotland, Catalonia, Quebec they're all part of larger political entities that some of their people don't want to be part of any longer. There's a mix of motivations: differing political centres, historical grievances, etc.
These change over time as well, the Scottish Nationalist Party before the 1970s was a nationalist party in the traditional sense, derided as the "Tartan Tories" by Labour. Of course, modern Scottish Nationalism is much more about the Scottish political centre being further to the left than that of the whole of Great Britain, and mainstream Scottish independence is now a pluralistic movement.
I think you are imagining that someone made a convoluted attempt to pretend that voting for parties that are against immigration and cultural/racial diversity in general is somehow pro-diversity?
No, that would indeed be an extraordinary thing to imagine.
posted by atrazine at 3:05 AM on October 6, 2018
François Legault assures muslim, sikh, jewish civil servants that they are free to wear crucifixes to work
posted by bonehead at 9:59 AM on October 12, 2018
posted by bonehead at 9:59 AM on October 12, 2018
Just popping back in here to confirm that my desire for Quebec to remain a part of Canada isn't due to my love of Canada, although I do love it. It's not due to my dislike for Quebec, because I love my province. It's not due to some blind federalist allegiance or even the fact that I like that Canada has a constitutional monarchy.
My desire for Quebec to remain a part of Canada comes from my experience of living in Quebec as a Canadian and having been old enough at the last referendum to understand what it might look like if Quebec were to secede.
First, Quebec has it good, as far as provinces go. We get a lot from the federal government, both in terms of money and freedom. Quebec is set to get over $11 billion in equalization payments from the Canadian government for the 2018-19 year. (source) Yet, sole amongst the provinces, people have to file income tax to both Quebec and Canada separately. We call our provincial government the "national" assembly. We have a "national" holiday on June 23, St-Jean-Baptiste. We have our civil (Napoleonic) code as the form of law rather than common law, used virtually everywhere else in North America except Louisiana. (source)
Quebec has latitude, is what I'm saying here, and that's even beyond the immigration powers Quebec has (more info), and doesn't even touch upon the fact that the official language here is French, which is unique to any other province in the country. (New Brunswick is officially bilingual.) Oh, and did I mention that it's written in the law that at least three Supreme Court Justices must be from Quebec? 'cause it's right there in the Supreme Court Act.
So Quebec, as a part of Canada, has a lot of freedom to do what it will, mostly because Quebec is, as they call it, a distinct society and that needs representation federally (hence the requirement that anyone getting services from the federal government must be able to choose English or French, regardless of where they are, for instance -- not to mention the Supreme Court Justices), plus the federal government lets Quebec do stuff regarding its population (immigration requirements) that other provinces don't get to do. Not that other provinces necessarily even want to do it, but Quebec gets to do it.
Within Canada, Quebec has the 2nd highest GDP (behind Ontario, just ahead of Alberta), though if you put this up against the world at large, we'd come in somewhere in the 30s, under Norway. We also have the third-lowest unemployment rate at 5.4%, which is below the 6% national average. Within Canada, Quebec also gets to take part in trade deals, like USMCA which, like it or not, is the new version of NAFTA and it's gonna stick around for a while.
All of this is to say that a Quebec within Canada is a big fish in a small pond. Take Quebec out of Canada and all of a sudden, it's a small fish in an ocean. Separation would likely upset the relative economic stability we have here, we'd have to iron out our part of the overall Canadian debt, we'd have to do something for a national currency (use the Canadian dollar? If they'd let us?), they'd have to renegotiate trade deals and, all of this while having to deal with threats of the island of Montreal (and greater Montreal area) trying to separate from Quebec itself or a mass exodus of people who don't want to stick around to be thought of as second-class citizens because they're not "pure laine" (dyed-in-the-wool) Quebecers.
A lot of the desire for separation isn't based in logical thought. Quebec would be absolutely weaker without being part of Canada and weaker still after any kind of exodus. In my experience (and I say this with an uncle who is a die-hard separatist), it's based on the continued perceived notion that "the money and the ethnic vote", to quote former Premier Jacques Parizeau, is making life shittier for the "real" (see: pure laine) Quebecers. That references the English (who have, historically, had more money than the French) and immigrants (who, even if they're francophones, apparently "don't count" as real Quebecers either).
If it made logical sense, financial and economic sense, to separate, I wouldn't be so very against it. If Canada suddenly went the way of North Korea and had a supreme leader whose word was law, I might even champion Quebec leaving Canada. But to try to strike out on our own because of the perception that the rich(er) English folks and immigrants are causing the problems that the under-educated and less-privileged French people have, because you're still bitter that Quebec was conquered by the British or because you just don't like people who aren't white descendants of the people who came over from France?
So even though a party like Quebec Solidaire is totally left-leaning, with a ton of amazing policies that I could absolutely get behind, they're never going to be a choice for me as long as separation is part of it. Quebec and Canada are both way better off with each other than without at this juncture and, frankly, I don't see that changing.
posted by juliebug at 9:18 PM on October 13, 2018 [4 favorites]
My desire for Quebec to remain a part of Canada comes from my experience of living in Quebec as a Canadian and having been old enough at the last referendum to understand what it might look like if Quebec were to secede.
First, Quebec has it good, as far as provinces go. We get a lot from the federal government, both in terms of money and freedom. Quebec is set to get over $11 billion in equalization payments from the Canadian government for the 2018-19 year. (source) Yet, sole amongst the provinces, people have to file income tax to both Quebec and Canada separately. We call our provincial government the "national" assembly. We have a "national" holiday on June 23, St-Jean-Baptiste. We have our civil (Napoleonic) code as the form of law rather than common law, used virtually everywhere else in North America except Louisiana. (source)
Quebec has latitude, is what I'm saying here, and that's even beyond the immigration powers Quebec has (more info), and doesn't even touch upon the fact that the official language here is French, which is unique to any other province in the country. (New Brunswick is officially bilingual.) Oh, and did I mention that it's written in the law that at least three Supreme Court Justices must be from Quebec? 'cause it's right there in the Supreme Court Act.
So Quebec, as a part of Canada, has a lot of freedom to do what it will, mostly because Quebec is, as they call it, a distinct society and that needs representation federally (hence the requirement that anyone getting services from the federal government must be able to choose English or French, regardless of where they are, for instance -- not to mention the Supreme Court Justices), plus the federal government lets Quebec do stuff regarding its population (immigration requirements) that other provinces don't get to do. Not that other provinces necessarily even want to do it, but Quebec gets to do it.
Within Canada, Quebec has the 2nd highest GDP (behind Ontario, just ahead of Alberta), though if you put this up against the world at large, we'd come in somewhere in the 30s, under Norway. We also have the third-lowest unemployment rate at 5.4%, which is below the 6% national average. Within Canada, Quebec also gets to take part in trade deals, like USMCA which, like it or not, is the new version of NAFTA and it's gonna stick around for a while.
All of this is to say that a Quebec within Canada is a big fish in a small pond. Take Quebec out of Canada and all of a sudden, it's a small fish in an ocean. Separation would likely upset the relative economic stability we have here, we'd have to iron out our part of the overall Canadian debt, we'd have to do something for a national currency (use the Canadian dollar? If they'd let us?), they'd have to renegotiate trade deals and, all of this while having to deal with threats of the island of Montreal (and greater Montreal area) trying to separate from Quebec itself or a mass exodus of people who don't want to stick around to be thought of as second-class citizens because they're not "pure laine" (dyed-in-the-wool) Quebecers.
A lot of the desire for separation isn't based in logical thought. Quebec would be absolutely weaker without being part of Canada and weaker still after any kind of exodus. In my experience (and I say this with an uncle who is a die-hard separatist), it's based on the continued perceived notion that "the money and the ethnic vote", to quote former Premier Jacques Parizeau, is making life shittier for the "real" (see: pure laine) Quebecers. That references the English (who have, historically, had more money than the French) and immigrants (who, even if they're francophones, apparently "don't count" as real Quebecers either).
If it made logical sense, financial and economic sense, to separate, I wouldn't be so very against it. If Canada suddenly went the way of North Korea and had a supreme leader whose word was law, I might even champion Quebec leaving Canada. But to try to strike out on our own because of the perception that the rich(er) English folks and immigrants are causing the problems that the under-educated and less-privileged French people have, because you're still bitter that Quebec was conquered by the British or because you just don't like people who aren't white descendants of the people who came over from France?
So even though a party like Quebec Solidaire is totally left-leaning, with a ton of amazing policies that I could absolutely get behind, they're never going to be a choice for me as long as separation is part of it. Quebec and Canada are both way better off with each other than without at this juncture and, frankly, I don't see that changing.
posted by juliebug at 9:18 PM on October 13, 2018 [4 favorites]
juliebug: we'd have to do something for a national currency (use the Canadian dollar? If they'd let us?)
I'm pretty sure we couldn't stop you - it'd be just like the various countries which have used the U.S. dollar as an official currency - and, IIRC, that was exactly Jacques Parizeau's plan. He figured that the risk of a new Quebec currency being instantly crushed on the international foreign exchange markets was too high.
posted by clawsoon at 8:41 AM on October 14, 2018
I'm pretty sure we couldn't stop you - it'd be just like the various countries which have used the U.S. dollar as an official currency - and, IIRC, that was exactly Jacques Parizeau's plan. He figured that the risk of a new Quebec currency being instantly crushed on the international foreign exchange markets was too high.
posted by clawsoon at 8:41 AM on October 14, 2018
« Older The stream is coming from inside the Netflix House | Even God is uneasy, Say the moist bells of Swansea... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Secret Sparrow at 9:11 AM on October 2, 2018 [1 favorite]