The level of government I am most interested in Quebec is the provincial level. This level controls most of Quebec’s social policies and also plays a potentially major role in the economy. Although the federal government still has important levers over Quebec policy, years of erosion have turned it largely into a chequebook and security government. Any policy innovation will probably come provincially within the next four years or so. Likewise, although municipal politics is important, the scope of what is possible is always limited by provincial interests. That is, municipal governments can only go so far.
The sovereigntist political left in Quebec is divided between three main parties: Parti Quebecois, Quebec solidaire and Option nationale. I don’t consider Option nationale a serious contender because it only received 1.9% of the vote in the past election and won zero seats. The main issue, in my mind, is between the Parti Quebecois, which won 32% of the vote and 54 seats, and Quebec solidaire, which won 6% of the vote and 2 seats.
I think both the PQ and QS have pluses and minuses.
My main worry about QS is that it isn’t really trying to win over Quebec. That is, it’s not a real governing party and it only tries to win a handful of seats in one general area of Montreal. While the PQ needs to moderate its policies to appeal to a wide range of people (and ends up winning a third or more of their support), QS simply focuses on programmatic statements based on left-wing logic. This means that QS has no real chance of putting its policies into place, and simply exists as a bloc to the left of the PQ which attempts to pull the PQ left. This role has largely been admitted in the past by some in the party.
At the same time, if QS were to move towards a more moderate left position, it wouldn’t have much reason to exist. It is a left-of-the-left grouping that might have a positive role to play in keeping the centre-left “honest” in some situations. It certainly seems like Pauline Marois (current PQ Premier) was worried about her left flank in the last election, when she released a quite progressive economic platform and campaigned largely from the left. But I’ve never had much time for groups that simply try to lobby another party from without. If your real goal is to lobby a party, then support that party.
A problem with the PQ, though, is more the opposite: It isn’t all that left wing in important areas. For example, in the past it has governed as a typical centrist party, making some cuts to social programs here and then extending them there. It also tends towards playing on fears of cultural diversity, playing towards a limited view of Quebec nationalism which focuses on ethnicity rather than civic nationalism. This led to a problematic policy in the last election which called for banning of religious symbols from the public service, trying to play off similar laws in France, although it went as far as saying headscarves and yarmulke would be banned. While I tend to focus on economic issues and social policy, this sort of thing makes me uncomfortable.
Anyway, that’s the sort of thing I’m thinking about now.
Goethestein posted:op do you even lift
This.
getfiscal posted:But I’ve never had much time for groups that simply try to lobby another party from without. If your real goal is to lobby a party, then support that party.
I don't understand. like you'd rather they be a faction? or would you rather they be disorganized individuals within the party
getfiscal posted:what's wrong with being gay. seems fine to me.
jesus christ.
Crow posted:I don't understand. like you'd rather they be a faction? or would you rather they be disorganized individuals within the party
I'd rather they be a pole within the party. At least due to First-Past-the-Post issues. For example, the PQ won 32% of the vote nationally. However, if they had had support of a few more percent, from QS and ON camp, they would have won a majority of seats, and could do a lot more. Ideally we would have a PR system and you could work these things out after elections. I'm not sure that changes the basic issue though - the point is trying to build a majority out of the population, not trying to simply win a small group within that.
Goethestein posted:jesus christ.
gay is okay.
Ironicwarcriminal posted:Why do you care about Quebec sovereignty?
I don't think there is any real good reason why Quebec should filter its interests through the Canadian federation. I think Quebec should have independent representation on the world stage. I think decentralization and local control would be positive for Quebec's economic issues, especially regional and social policy. I also think that culturally Quebec suffers a lot from chauvinism in the rest of Canada, and that the federal government is very corrupt towards Quebec, and that this sort of thing would probably be undermined in an independent Quebec.
getfiscal posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Why do you care about Quebec sovereignty?
I don't think there is any real good reason why Quebec should filter its interests through the Canadian federation. I think Quebec should have independent representation on the world stage. I think decentralization and local control would be positive for Quebec's economic issues, especially regional and social policy. I also think that culturally Quebec suffers a lot from chauvinism in the rest of Canada, and that the federal government is very corrupt towards Quebec, and that this sort of thing would probably be undermined in an independent Quebec.
a) Isn't Quebec heavily subsidized be the other states?
b) could the same arguments you just made be equally applied to Alberta?
Ironicwarcriminal posted:a) Isn't Quebec heavily subsidized be the other states?
b) could the same arguments you just made be equally applied to Alberta?
a) Equalization transfers only account for about 1% of GDP and are declining. This would probably be offset by savings in other areas. For example, Quebec is very anti-war and many sovereigntists do not want a full military, which alone might save about 1% of its GDP.
b) I don't think Alberta has the same sort of colonial history as Quebec, nor chauvinism against it from the rest of Canada, nor economic issues that would make independence progressive in a general way.
I think think they need to suck it up and deal with it, like Alberta does with subsidizing the Maritimes. Splitting would tear the heart out of Canada and there is no reason for Quebec to be on the “world” stage, what will some new country of 8 million people have to add about anything.
They’re progressive and internationalist sure, but so is London. It doesn’t mean anyone would be served by an independent London
drwhat posted:I think the London example is pretty poor though. London is the state. It may be named England but London's served by the whole apparatus. Should there be an independent Scotland? I don't see why not.
Same for Cornwall, same for Wales, same for Bradford. where does it end?
i watched a cbc program where they had a panel commenting on the potential economic fallout of the provincial election. everyone agreed it would be a disaster. that's because there was no representative from the broad quebecois left (which won 40% of the vote and now holds power).
getfiscal posted:one thing that's pretty noticeable to me is how bad coverage is of quebec politics in english media. like the CBC will post news stories about major quebec political events and they will obviously be written by interns who don't even speak french. the stories will spell the names of the groups involved wrong. when canadian papers run stories about quebec they almost always skew towards minor views promoted by the anglophone right in the province.
i watched a cbc program where they had a panel commenting on the potential economic fallout of the provincial election. everyone agreed it would be a disaster. that's because there was no representative from the broad quebecois left (which won 40% of the vote and now holds power).
One thing that's pretty noticeable to me is how bad coverage is of Israeli politics in Arab media. like Al Jazeera will post news stories about major Israeli political events and they will obviously be written by journalists who don't even speak Hebrew. the stories will spell the names of the groups involved wrong. When Lebanese or even French papers run stories about Israel they almost always skew towards minor views promoted by the antiwar left in that country.
Ironicwarcriminal posted:getfiscal posted:one thing that's pretty noticeable to me is how bad coverage is of quebec politics in english media. like the CBC will post news stories about major quebec political events and they will obviously be written by interns who don't even speak french. the stories will spell the names of the groups involved wrong. when canadian papers run stories about quebec they almost always skew towards minor views promoted by the anglophone right in the province.
i watched a cbc program where they had a panel commenting on the potential economic fallout of the provincial election. everyone agreed it would be a disaster. that's because there was no representative from the broad quebecois left (which won 40% of the vote and now holds power).One thing that's pretty noticeable to me is how bad coverage is of Israeli politics in Arab media. like Al Jazeera will post news stories about major Israeli political events and they will obviously be written by journalists who don't even speak Hebrew. the stories will spell the names of the groups involved wrong. When Lebanese or even French papers run stories about Israel they almost always skew towards minor views promoted by the antiwar left in that country.
Hm interesting point which isnt true. You really made everyone think
getfiscal posted:i only try to respond to factual questions that IWC asks because i know he has a problem. he trolls because he can't stop.
.
I am genuinely contemptuous towards francophone succession though, I think ultimately it would be better if they just let the language thing take it’s course.
Lots of states and provinces have their own quirks and you don’t want to start poking holes through the dam wall of federalism
1. i expect to live in this area for a few years, and they dominate this area. if the main goal is to shift the province left, it doesn't make much sense to support a social democrat against a socialist.
2. QS has a platform i support strongly, such that it doesn't make sense to oppose them just for tactical reasons.
Nuff said.
Makeshift_Swahili posted:
#HamasBumperStickers
I think it's pretty self evident that you should support QS if you agree with them? I'm not a professional political scientist or anything but yeah
i'd strongly consider moving back to Montreal if the talk about sovereignty ever became serious