Quebec's separatist movement in the context of other separatist movements

@jeanne-mayell thanks for tagging me, I do have opinions on this but as always I am not sure how to make sense of them. 

I spent 4 years in Montreal, living the first 2 years in the French end and the last two years in NDG the English end. During my time there the student protests were in full swing as was the issue of Quebec sovereignty and values (look up the charter of values, Pauline Marois). As an anglophone it was a challenge for me to navigate a francophone society but I moved there precisely because I wanted to do this so no complaints from me. 

Quebec culture is unique and fascinating, to this day there's so much I want to learn about it that I feel I missed. There was a major debate about language going on when I was there, sometimes this manifested itself in comical ways like the time a famous restaurant in St. Laurent was fined for using the word pasta on it's menu instead of the French pate alimentaire - this was dubbed pastagate on twitter. 

There definitely were times when I felt hostility from people because I was an anglophone struggling to learn their language, but overall that was a very small minority of people. 

In regards to separatism a historical arc needs to be drawn and I think it can help explain what may or may not happen in the future in regards to other places like Catalonia or Scotland. 

Quebecois people have felt like an oppressed minority for much of their 400 year history, due largely to being surrounded by the anglosphere on all sides. Prior to the 1960's most of the francophone population lived and worked under English domination. In practice what this meant was that most top jobs went to Anglophones and those of French stock were often stuck in lower positions with less opportunity. It is absolutely remarkable that the Quebecois people have retained their culture and language so well after centuries of separation from France. Other communities like the Cajun's in Louisiana haven't fared as well and I don't fully know why. 

But during what they call the quiet revolution of the 60's they took their province back, instituted French language laws (Bill 101 ) and started agitating for separation. Their economy suffered quite seriously because of this and it helps explain why Toronto today is a larger city than Montreal. But overall I think they realized that they had something to protect that was worth more than money and they did so. So why have they not separated despite coming very close to doing so in 1995. 

I think that Quebec eventually going it's own way is contingent on whether or not they are comfortable staying in Canada. Support for separatism hovers around 30% most of the time, this number swells during crisis moments and shrinks otherwise. Currently the Canadian constitution has something called the not withstanding clause, basically it means a province can ignore federal legislation to enact unconstitutional laws by invoking that clause. That clause exists because Quebec refused to sign and therefore ratify a Canadian constitution without it (Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Pierre Trudeau). This clause works like a safety valve that lets off steam and allows Quebec to keep their language legislation (which is unconstitutional everywhere else) as well as the recently enacted laws forbidding religious gear in public sector jobs (includes hijabs, the cross, yarmulkes etc...) which naturally has drawn serious criticism. But Quebec is like France and committed to public secularism so they won't budge on this one and the clause allows them to get away with it. 

Currently Quebec has the best of both worlds. They enjoy a high standard of living, for the most part run their own internal affairs (hence the term federation) and are not bothered about their language laws. All children who's parents did not attend English school in Quebec must attend French school and so the young are largely francophone now. So the people who continue to be adamant about separation are those who want to control their own foreign policy and things like that, internally they act like a separate country already. 

Support for separation will go up if they feel that the federal government is hostile to them, which is not currently the case and which doesn't happen too often. Quebec is a large voting block second to Ontario, together the two of them largely choose who wins elections, and both provinces trend left most of the time (exceptions happen like Doug Ford), so Quebec has allies. Alberta which trends right feels more marginalized federally because of the fact that they have a smaller population and therefore their choices are less likely to win federally. If Quebec begins to feel betrayed then they will want to separate more, but currently the atmosphere is one of varying degrees of cooperation which seems to be working and therefore the prospect of separation is not a serious one at the moment. 

This ties in to what I have to say about Scotland which I will post in that section. 

Generally, I'm supportive of most independence movements because the more the world becomes "balkanized," the more people will let go of the idea of hard borders and arbitrary identities based on nation-states. It's also a general principle of systems theory that a greater diversity of smaller units creates a more functional whole. In the case of global geopolitics, this means that a larger number of sovereign political units will help create societal health more so than a small number of super-states.

But in Quebec's case, where do First Nations stand? If I'm not mistaken, they were mostly opposed to the 1995 independence referendum. Jacques Parizeau also singled out the "ethnic vote" as for why separatists fell short in 1995. I think he was also taking aim at Montreal's immigrant population, but either way, the 90s separatists didn't seem very inclusive. If Quebec independence becomes popular again, I hope the separatists can find a way to be welcoming to people who aren't white.

@Natalie, thank you for an excellent history and update.  You are a born writer, thinker, philosopher.  And @coyote, thank you for tying it altogether with other separatist movements and yes, the issue of leaving out the non white population. In the 1960's the U.S. federal government served to protect marginalized populations from local bigotry, most famously with segregated education. Hard to believe we have gone 180 degrees in the position of federal versus state governments. 

I'll say this too - I work for a regional bank based in Quebec and I am working closer with my colleagues in Montreal. All of the younger folks are bilingual, and many are first generation Quebeckers who are fluent in both English and French.  There's a bit of it going both ways where more people I know who live in Ontario are learning French on their own or, have become fluent, and my French colleagues they are very, very keen to speak in English with us.

On calls, we often playfully argue who gets to practice their French or English lol (I always lose the argument because I also think they don't want to hear my Ontarian French accent, oooof). Or it just flips between English and French multiple times in one conversation. 

This is also though younger people who have grown up in Montreal, or moved to Montreal from the Eastern Townships or from up north. It's going to be interesting to see how people now in their 20-40s who were only kids or teens during the 1995 referendum and are now more bi-lingual then their parents attach themselves to Quebec nationalism in the future. 

PART I

Hello everyone. Normally I don't get into the good old Separation conversation.  I've also been watching US news in the past 4 years as a way to support my US cousins, so I'm not up to date on everything

Last week, my mother who has ALWAYS been anti-separatist told me that if there was to be a referendum today, she would vote YES!   I fell off my chair twice before I could recover from this affirmation.  I believe my father is pretty much of the same opinion.  Why?  Because of the "Act respecting the laicity of the State".  This law is currently being contested by groups and the Canadian Government.

The Act respecting the laicity of the State, is actually aimed at people of authority such as Judges, Police officers, teachers, government official.  It is to demonstrate their neutrality.  That is  also to be respected only while they are in their official roles.  In their private life they're free to do as they want just like the rest of the citizens.  It's like a dress code for the office.  When I was still working, no one was allowed to wear jeans at the office except on Fridays.  Same thing here.

Here is a very personal opinion: I believe the Québécois feel a little threaten by the increase in immigration.  The immigrants prefer to learn English for the most part, so they stay in Montreal, which keeps growing as a more anglophone city.  Since it is the biggest city in the province of Québec, it could feel threatening to our language, culture, customs.  But immigrations going to continue increasing. So it is UP TO US to create programs facilitating THEIR insertion in OUR society if we want to continue keeping our beautiful culture and language.

To Be Continued...

PART II

Up to the 1960s, we were oppressed by English Canada but also the Catholic Church.  Have you ever heard of political "advice" being given by a priest during mass, telling their parishioners if they vote for the Liberals (red banner) you will go to hell, or of a priest visiting women (had 10 kids in 10 years)  reproaching them they hadn't had a baby this year it’s time for you to have more, that fornicating is an evil act & sex is for reproduction only?  Yeah...  That happened to one of my boyfriend's mom and she was not an isolated case.

The quiet revolution was also to liberate us from the oppression of the Church.  Vatican II helped us out with that.  Improved education. Laws protecting our youths.  It culminated, unfortunately with the October Crisis: the Front de liberation du Quebec kidnapped Vice Prime Minister Pierre Laporte and British diplomat James Cross.  Pierre Laporte was murdered.  It tempered down after that and I would say ended with the election of a sovereigntist government in 1976, René Lévesque's, whom we have to thank for the idea of separation taking hold in our society and for Bill 101.

Personally, I am against the idea of separation.  My Canada includes Québec and my Québec is in Canada.  My mother says I should watch more francophone news, she is right.  But it would take a lot for me to change my mind.  We still feel Québec isn’t being treated entirely fairly by the federal government.  But, things are 1000% better.  It's all about our "Distinct Société", protecting our French language and our culture.

@Sam , my generation never had the opportunity to learn English until 5th grade (50 min 1x/wk).   When I left Québec, I couldn’t speak English. We’re very conscious of this and are doing everything we can to begin teaching our children at a much younger age. But you’re right in saying that people from the Eastern Township & Montreal are much more anglophone/bilingual.

I also believe that in my school years, while I was NOT learning English properly, much more efforts was spent in the English provinces to teach the children french!  Which probably helped the Acadians keep their French over the last century.  

Lastly, I want to apologize to @Natalie for the way you were sometimes treated by French Canadian.  I've lived in different areas in Canada and went through the same thing during the last referendum.