[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Valmy]

The notion that Quebec is a fundamental outsider while places like Nunavut and Newfoundland are "insiders" strikes me as slightly risible.

If you live in Alberta, the "other" is central Canada - an entity that combines Ontario and Quebec.

People in Quebec lump the RoC together; but people outside Quebec just as often divide things totally differently.

Canada: a nation of obnoxious special snowflakes who have nothing in common?

[Malthus]

Canada: a nation of obnoxious special snowflakes who have nothing in common?

Pretty well.

If anything, certain parts of the country have "something in common" with their opposites south of the border.

For example, southern Ontario has more in common with the other great lakes states, moreso even than with northern Ontario; BC has more in common with West Coast states; and Atlantic Canada, with New England states. It helps that most of the Canadian population is located within 100 KM of the border, that traditional routes of trade and influence move north-south more than east-west. In fact, it is hard to even get from Ontario to Manitoba - there is, like, one road connecting the two provinces, plus the railroad of course. 

A look at a geological map shows why these settlement patters happened the way they did.

However, such regionalism isn't exactly unknown in the US, Texan. 

[Grey Fox]

We have strayed far from "Is it possible for a non Quebec born political figure to be popular in Quebec?" here.

[crazy canuck]

We have strayed far from "Is it possible for a non Quebec born political figure to be popular in Quebec?" here.

And even further from the question of whether it is fair to blame Mulcair for everything that happened during the election. 

But we did have one of the better discussions in the life of this thread.

Very enjoyable.

[Malthus]

We have strayed far from "Is it possible for a non Quebec born political figure to be popular in Quebec?" here.

And even further from the question of whether it is fair to blame Mulcair for everything that happened during the election. 

But we did have one of the better discussions in the life of this thread.

Very enjoyable.

Certainly more fun than discussing Mr. Mulcair.

Which, when you come to think about it, was part of his problem as a politician ... 

[crazy canuck]

 

[Oexmelin]

The notion that Quebec is a fundamental outsider while places like Nunavut and Newfoundland are "insiders" strikes me as slightly risible.

And I find the insistence that Quebec is just like any other place in Canada slightly deluded. But of course, it is an inherently a political point that masquerades as objective observation.

I am not talking about political power and influence here. I am talking about the dynamics of political participation, and what constitutes a political forum, and the conditions of political access. And if there is one thing that this forum has made abundantly clear over the years is how access to media, national media, and media in different language, shapes pretty powerfully political perception.

[Josephus]

We have strayed far from "Is it possible for a non Quebec born political figure to be popular in Quebec?" here.

And even further from the question of whether it is fair to blame Mulcair for everything that happened during the election. 

But we did have one of the better discussions in the life of this thread.

Very enjoyable.

Certainly more fun than discussing Mr. Mulcair.

Which, when you come to think about it, was part of his problem as a politician ... 

His fake smile was also worse than Harper's

[Valmy]

However, such regionalism isn't exactly unknown in the US, Texan. 

Hey if I moved to Maine there would be some strange stuff but I would adjust as we all have common American cultural references. As opposed to the brutal culture shock you would seem to get going to Newfoundland.

[Grey Fox]

Really?

They look pretty a like from my perspective. Maine has more guns, Newfoundland has seals.

[Malthus]

However, such regionalism isn't exactly unknown in the US, Texan. 

Hey if I moved to Maine there would be some strange stuff but I would adjust as we all have common American cultural references. As opposed to the brutal culture shock you would seem to get going to Newfoundland.

Yes, Yankees and Southerners, no possible cultural differences there. 

Sure, if I moved anywhere in Canada I would "adjust". But anyone who thinks Newfoundland is just like Toronto is in for a bit of a surprise.

[Valmy]

Yes, Yankees and Southerners, no possible cultural differences there. 

Sure, if I moved anywhere in Canada I would "adjust". But anyone who thinks Newfoundland is just like Toronto is in for a bit of a surprise.

Yeah but that is a bit of a strawman isn't it? Does any country with any size have that quality?

[viper37]

However, such regionalism isn't exactly unknown in the US, Texan. 

Hey if I moved to Maine there would be some strange stuff but I would adjust as we all have common American cultural references. As opposed to the brutal culture shock you would seem to get going to Newfoundland.

Well, you didn't pick the easiest one either.  I assure you, I would have a brutal shock myself if I was forced to move to Newfoundland

Now, I'm French, so my perspectives are skewed.  And I'm more right-wing than most of my fellow Québécois, so, even more skewed perspectives.

However, I think that for someone like Malthus, work conditions notwithstanding, he would be equally at ease in Halifax or Boston.  The cultural shock wouldn't be that great.  Move him to Charleston or Jackson, it's another thing entirely.

I could see him easily moving from Toronto to Montreal's west island.  I don't think he would survive in Quebec city though

[Malthus]

The notion that Quebec is a fundamental outsider while places like Nunavut and Newfoundland are "insiders" strikes me as slightly risible.

And I find the insistence that Quebec is just like any other place in Canada slightly deluded. But of course, it is an inherently a political point that masquerades as objective observation.

I am not talking about political power and influence here. I am talking about the dynamics of political participation, and what constitutes a political forum, and the conditions of political access. And if there is one thing that this forum has made abundantly clear over the years is how access to media, national media, and media in different language, shapes pretty powerfully political perception.

I don't think Quebec is "just like any other place in Canada", let alone "insist" on it, so that's all good.

My point is that Quebec is quite different from other places in Canada ... and other places in Canada are, as well, different from each other.

It all depends on one's perspective. People in Quebec insist on their uniqueness, and that is fine, but what is not fine is when they assume - quite wrongly - that everywhere else in Canada shares a fundamental similarity: that BC is in some profound sense 'the same as' Newfoundland or Nunavut.

If you are sitting in BC, you see "central Canada" as the monolithic entity that dominates federal politics and shapes "Canadian" culture, what with its duality and tensions between "upper" and "lower" Canada - and tend to feel that your province, with its Asian-influenced population, native land claims, and Pacific focus, is the "outlier".

Similarly, if you sit in Newfoundland, you look to your unique heritage and history - and status as 'have nots' permanently lacking jobs - as making you an outlier.

Nunavut - well, your population is majority first Nations and you aren't even a full province: your official languages include Inuinnaqtun and Inuktitut, spoken at home by more than 50% of the population - a lot more "isolating" than French. Surely that makes you an outlier, no?

[Malthus]

Yes, Yankees and Southerners, no possible cultural differences there. 

Sure, if I moved anywhere in Canada I would "adjust". But anyone who thinks Newfoundland is just like Toronto is in for a bit of a surprise.

Yeah but that is a bit of a strawman isn't it? Does any country with any size have that quality?

Yes, which is sorta my point. Why are you attempting to argue against it, if it is obviously true?