Here are some relatively recent surveys I have found about some of the strongest and/or best known independence movements in the world. These surveys were conducted with different questions and standards, but it still can help one understand better. I may update it in the near future so keep aware. ;) --Liberlogos 05:24, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
Basque Country
- 2005 survey on the Ibarretxe plan: 47% in favour (27% opposed) - [4]
- 2004 survey on political future: 31% in favour of independence (32% for status quo, 31% for federal model of greater autonomy) - [5]
Scotland
- 2005 survey on independence (probably within the EU): 46% in favour (39% opposed, 15% undecided) - [6]
Catalonia
- 2001 survey on independence: 35.9% in favour (48.1% opposed, 13.3% undecided) - [7] (tell us if you find a more recent one)
Taiwan
- Opinion on independence (unknown date): 30% in favour - [8] (Wikipedia article without reference)
Brittany
- 2000 survey on independence (unknown date): 19% in favour, in current departments of Britanny (30% in Loire-Atlantique) - [9]
- I also thought of "PQBQ BBQ" as a title, but decided otherwise. ;-P So, secondly, I will now briefly examine here the similarity between the Parti Québécois and the Bloc Québécois. As I argued earlier, the Bloc Québécois has become a party with a social and economic stance, which can be compared with le parti de René Lévesque. I do not want to qualify if and how much a coalition it was before, for now (I'll study this further and maybe discuss it another time). I'll only additionally put forward the fact that, like Gyslain Lebel, the more right-wing Pierre Brien also left his seat to join the fiscally "conservative" ADQ.
- My (personal and open to debate) assessment is that the Bloc is now very similar on the ground of Ideals with a capital "I". Since people of one party are often active in the other, this helps that phenomenon. Where they differ is on the ground of the gameplan. This is in great part caused by a simple fact: their functions and opportunities are fundamentally distinct on some aspects. BQ and PQ are not on the same level of government. This entails that they must elaborate and perfect their said gameplans differently.
- Noteworthy difference: The Bloc must elaborate arguments, projects, theories amd actions that are within reach in this federal parliament. Simple example: it cannot directly help causes that do not concern the federal level. The PQ must also concentrate on the level on which the National Assembly of Quebec as power. However, the mutual consultation helps the pair greatly in their own dealings with the other political level. Also, the fact that both have as ultimate goal a sovereign country leads them to both reflect and organize reflection events on all matters of all aspects of any political level.
- Major difference: The function of the PQ is, in the Opposition, to criticize (and approve, if something happens to be more closely faithful to the PQ's convictions and the common good). It's goal is: to take power (from a party with opposing convictions), the make sovereignty advance, to win a referendum, to build the foundations of the new sovereign nation. The function of the BQ is to help sovereignty, but also to defend Quebec interests, notably by defending National Assembly concensus. It therefor must defend ALL parties of the National Assembly, even adversaries. --Liberlogos 05:28, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Barnstar of National Merit of Quebec
edit
For your impressive work of translation about Quebec and its Leaders of State, and for sharing Quebec with Poland and the world, I present to you the Barnstar of National Merit of Quebec. --Liberlogos 01:04, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
Translation & Lévesque
editThank you for your translation efforts on 'the Wikipedias' (like 'the Americas', I guess)! Thank you especially for your succinct but essential translation of the article about René Lévesque. I am curious about what brought you to know about him or brought you to the article. Will you ever get the chance to translate a bit more of the article? I think spreading knowledge to other language-speaking communities is a beautiful and very important part of the potential of Wikipedia. For that, well, congrats and thanks. --Liberlogos 02:59, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
| First round | Second round | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Candidate | Votes | Percentage | Votes | Percentage | |
| Louis Bernard | |||||
| André Boisclair | |||||
| Pierre Dubuc | |||||
| Ghislain Lebel | |||||
| Richard Legendre | |||||
| Pauline Marois | |||||
| Jean Ouimet | |||||
| Gilbert Paquette | |||||
| Jean-Claude St-André | |||||
| Totals | 100.0% | 100.0% | |||
This is a finding Quebec investigative journalist Normand Lester made during his research for Le Livre noir du Canada anglais, translated as The Black Book of English Canada. The book examines the subject in its section from page 253 to page 266. It cites many examples of letters of Arcand pledging his loyalty to Bennet and asking him for funds.
Controversy
editPublished in 2001 by Quebecois investigative journalist Normand Lester (himself part Jewish), Le Livre noir du Canada anglais (later translated as translated as The Black Book of English Canada) first reported a relationship between R. B. Bennett and fascist Adrien Arcand.
The book tells that, before the 1930 federal election campaign, Adrien Arcand and his associate Joseph Ménard were secretly approached by then-senator Joseph H. Rainville, in the name of Conservative leader in opposition Richard Bedford Bennett. Arcand and Ménard were offered a initial garanteed funding of 25,000 dollars (equivalent to 268,577 dollars today, according to the book) and promise of further financial support for their newspapers, now known for their anti-semitic content. In return, their publications (at the time, Le Miroir and Le Goglu; Le Chameau would soon follow) and Arcand's movement l'Ordre patriotique des Goglus would need to help the Conservative Party of Canada win at least 12 seats in the upcoming election.
A letter from Adrien Arcand refers to Arcand and Bennett meeting each other and the exposition of the plan to the future Canadian PM:
- Last week, my partner Jos. Ménard and I were honored and favored with an interview with you. Our plan of procedure and propaganda was exposed to you as well as our program of meetings throughout this province. [12]
Another letter of Adrien Arcand and Joseph Ménard to R. B. Bennett shows the loyalty they profess towards the latter:
- We will be glad and proud in our misfortune to have loyally served our ideal, our country, the doctrin (sic) of our Party and the Godsent man who leads our country so wisely in this hour of great distress and who has all our admiration and confidence. […] If God permits that, by one way of the other, we survive for one week or one year, you may rest assured that we will be during that time as we have been since our first interview, Your loyal and faithful Soldiers, Adrien Arcand Joseph Ménard [13]
References
edit- ^ The letter is conserved at the National Archives of Canada in Ottawa. A photocopy can be found at the archives of the Canadian Jewish Council in Montreal, under P0005 ARCAND, Adrien (collection).
- ^ Can also be found at the archives of the Canadian Jewish Council in Montreal, under P0005 ARCAND, Adrien (collection).
| |
|
| Emergency bot shutoff button |
| • |
| Anyone Use this button if you think this bot is currently malfunctioning. |
England
edit- When I say that we owe nothing to England, I speak in regards of politics, for I am convinced, and I shall die with this conviction, that the Union of Upper and Lower Canada as well as Confederation were imposed to us with a purpose hostile to the French element and with the hope of making it disappear in a more or less distant future. I wanted to show you what our homeland could be. I have made my best to open yourselves up to new horizons and, as I let you glimpse at them, push your hearts towards the fulfilment of our national destinies. You have colonial dependence, I offer you independence; you have shame and misery, I offer you fortune and prosperity; you are but a colony ignored by the whole world, I offer you becoming a great people, respected and recognized amongst free nations. Men, women and children, the choice is yours; you can remain slaves in the state of colony, or become independent and free, amongst the other peoples that, with their powerful voices beckon you to the banquet of nations.
Quand je dis que nous ne devons rien à l'Angleterre, je parle au point de vue politique car je suis convaincu, et je mourrai avec cette conviction, que l'union du Haut et du Bas Canada ainsi que la Confédération nous ont été imposées dans un but hostile à l'élément français et avec l'espérance de le faire disparaître dans un avenir plus ou moins éloigné. J'ai voulu vous démontrer ce que pouvait être notre patrie. J'ai fait mon possible pour vous ouvrir de nouveaux horizons et, en vous les faisant entrevoir, pousser vos coeurs vers la réalisation de nos destinées nationales. Vous avez la dépendance coloniale, je vous offre l'indépendance; vous avez la gêne et la misère, je vous offre la fortune et la prospérité; vous n'êtes qu'une colonie ignorée du monde entier, je vous offre de devenir un grand peuple, respecté et reconnu parmi les nations libres. Hommes, femmes et enfants, à vous de choisir; vous pouvez rester esclaves dans l'état de colonie, ou devenir indépendant et libre, au milieu des autres peuples qui, de leurs voix toutes puissantes vous convient au banquet des nations.
- Honoré Mercier. Speech of April 4, 1893.
- These bribes had been torn off, with one hand from the ill will of the aristocratic government of England, always hostile to popular rights; and, with the other hand, from an oligarchy, weak in number, null in merit, landed just yesterday from overseas, and that the metropolis, by an arbitrary partiality, had constituted local dominant power.
- According to these thrice sanctified and just principles, Canada, since it has become English, has not yet had a constitution. It has had an infinite variety of administrations, all bad. Each and every one of them deserves and will obtain from the impartial history only disgust for their defects, and fadings for the names of their authors, who organized the oppression of majorities by minorities.
- This is how the English government was represented, at the beginning, by men capable of such aberrations of the mind, culprits of such excesses.
- It is not the precipitated acceptance of the butched Quebec Act of confederation that can prove the wisdom of the statesmen of England. It is not their work; it was prepared in hiding, without the authorization of their constituents, by some colonists anxious to stud themselves to the power that had escaped them. The sinistre project is the works of badly famed and personally interested men, it is the achievement of evil at the British Parliament, surprised, misled, and inattentive to what it was doing.
- By recapitulating some phases of our country's history to indicate you the policy that was systematically followed by the aristocratic government of England, in its old and its new colonies, I wanted to show you that this system was always imposed according to the natural prejudices of the caste who governs us in her own interest, interest which is in perpetual and irremediable conflict with those of the masses; that it was harmful to new establishments in America; that the interest of those is to ask for their emancipation as soon as possible, and to acquire all the advantages and all the privileges of new nationalities, completely independent from Europe.
- Louis-Joseph Papineau
- Not a single one, not a single one among us, in 200 years, has won a battle... and this is what it is to be colonized! When we have but martyrs! How can we have aspirations!? How can we have the will to fight!?
- Pierre Bourgault
- Pauline Julien refuses to sing for the Queen.
Quebec sovereignty movement: Exceptions
editThe independovereigntistiote movement
editJe regardais les articles Quebec sovereigntist movement et History of the Quebec sovereignty movement et je crois qu'il faudra se taper une joyeuse refonte du texte interne et de la structure externe des articles. Je me questionne aussi sur la nécessité de scinder Quebec sovereigntist movement et History of the Quebec sovereignty movement. Toutefois, s'ils devaient demeurer séparés, il faudrait refaire la section Quebec sovereigntist movement#History. Bon! Pour la structure, voici une hypothèse que je postule pour un chemin à suivre, sous forme d'organigrammes (le liens rouge est un article à créer; les titres sans lien sont des sections).
Première hypothèse.
- Quebec independence movement ou Quebec independence*
- Struggle for New France
- Patriote movement**
- Reform movement
- Lower Canada Rebellion
- 1940-1956***
- Quebec sovereignty movement
*: Les Écossais ont choisi le titre Scottish independence. Cela permet un traitement plus naturel de l'indépendance autrefois acquise, puis perdue (puis acquise et perdue) de la-dite nation. Mais je ne me prononce pas pour un titre ou un autre encore.
**: Cela pourrait être en partie le texte de Quebec nationalism#Canadien liberal nationalism (on opérerait une légère restructuration de Quebec nationalism par la même occasion).
***: Je me demande si l'on pourrait trouver un autre titre à ça. À la suite de mes récentes recherches et lectures, j'ai relevé une foule de faits intéressants sur les éclats d'indépendantisme pendant la période de l'Acte d'union à l'Alliance laurentienne. Et ma recherche n'est pas terminée: j'ai aussi trouvé une référence à un livre traitant de la quête d'une Laurentie libre pendant cette époque. En passant, j'ai écrit pour l'Alliance laurentienne un article anglophone et j'ai déjà découvert un peu plus sur les origines du concept de Laurentie, ce que j'ai incorporé à l'article sur le sujet que j'ai fondé (Laurentie (concept)).
Alors, qu'est-ce que tu en penses? --Liberlogos 12:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Scottish
editThanks. I'm aware of the current good fortunes of the movement. The 51% is even more impressive once you get to know that the opposite opinion is at 39%, not 49%, with 10% undecided. I had even read the Le Monde article already! It was linked on the Quebec independence website Vigile.net. Of course, appeal to fear from opponents is to be expected and, believe me, from our experience, it has only begun. The comical similarity of the fear tactics used in Scotland and Quebec was quite apparent with McConnell's Quebec affair four years ago (see link)..
Just to illustrate this point, I'll name you some common attacks on Quebec independence. "We are living in an ever globalizing world where peoples increasingly unite and collaborate within greater ensembles" (sovereigntists will counter that on the contrary they wish the same since they want an economic association with Canada but in equality, like you wish to be in the EU), "Nation-states, nations and nationalism are concepts of the 19th century", "Economic consequences would be disastrous", "[Canada] would not want to trade with us", "We'll lose [Canadian] resources (like Albertan oil)", "We'll lose [insert Canadian landmark or element here, the ultimate cliché being the Rocky mountains]", "We are too small and would have less weight in the world", "Jobs will be lost, companies will leave, prices will skyrocket (the sky will fall, the plague, the flames, the Knights of the Apocalypse)"... Ring any bells? Am I reciting your own broken record?
About the two referendums. Your line on that made me laugh.
So, here are some questions.
- Terminology
- Sides: In Quebec, those against independence call themselves "fédéralistes". Those for independence call themselves "souverainistes" (Quebec neologism) and/or "indépendantistes". Some feel the former is softer and the latter stronger, so moderates and hardliners sometimes have a preference, but a great number use both. What are the terms in Scotland? I understand many use "nationalist", but here "nationaliste" is used self-referencially by a great number of federalists and all major non-sovereigntist parties in Quebec claim to be nationalist. I seem to understand that "unionist" is not exactly consensual in meaning "against independence". How do Scots identify them?
- "Separatist": In Quebec, "séparatiste" was used self-referentially only in the beginnings of the contemporary independence movement, let's say between 1957 and sometime in the 60s. It is now is shunned by most independentists (some can be offended by the word) and most Quebec-level federalist politicians do not use it. If used in French, it is clearly partisan and often used as a "scare weapon". When reported in French-speaking media, it is invariably put in quotation marks. In English Canada, the term is used a lot, in partisan and neutral ways, although some media do use "sovereigntist". What is the situation with the word "separatist" in Scotland?
- "Country": I understand the use of "country" for the nation is more wide-spread than in other non-sovereign nations. How consensual is it to use the word "country" for Scotland, when speaking of the present time? Is there a difference on the side of unionists? How much of a political statement is saying "Scotland is a big country", if one at all? How is it elsewhere in the United Kingdom (still for Scotland)?
- Attacks
- When I read about arguments in Scottish politics, I am much amused to see the similarities. I'll name you some common attacks on Quebec independence. "We are living in an ever globalizing world where peoples increasingly unite and collaborate within greater ensembles" (sovereigntists will counter that on the contrary they wish the same since they want an economic association with Canada but in equality, like you wish to be in the EU), "Nation-states, nations and nationalism are concepts of the 19th century", "Economic consequences would be disastrous", "Canada would not want to trade with us", "We'll lose Canadian resources (like Albertan oil)", "We'll lose [insert Canadian landmark here, especially the Rocky mountains]", "We are too small and would have less weight in the world", "Jobs will be lost, companies will leave, prices will skyrocket (the sky will fall, the plague, the flames, the Knights of the Apocalypse)"... Ring any bells? Am I reciting your own broken record?
- Demographics
- What kind of reach does independence have in minorities? Is integration easy for them in the Scottish society? How much of an issue is tolerance in the independence movement? Is the accusation of "racism" by opponents and the suspicion of it in the movement a major issue?
- Is there a sizable community of people from England in Scotland and if so, how is their integration and are they much more against independence?
- Obtainment
- Since the contemporary Scottish Assembly, a party can now take power and hold a referendum on independence. Before then, what were the plans on how independence would be achieved? Is there any debate still on the means of a referendum?
- Acceptability
- Was it ever a risk, professional, social or other, to declare oneself for independence? What about now? Here, a past Parti Québécois candidate (Jewish anglophone to boot) was nominated for director of an Ottawa hospital and a wave of angry protests erupted which was even joined by the Ontarian Premier.
- What is the acceptability of the movement in England and in the UK? In English Canada, some wake up at night to hate "separatists" and fighting sovereigntists can be quite profitable politically. Inversly, appearance of proximity with them can be dangerous. Finding support for Quebec independence in English Canada would be insanely hard, especially outside the "let the whining bastards go if they don't like it" attitude. What is the attitude in England; more indifference? I saw the poll in one of your articles.
- Language
- Are there concrete plans to make Scottish Gaelic and the Scots language stronger, notably in the independence movement?
- How are Scots living with the English language? Can Scots be proud of this language they speak despite the way Scotland came to speak it?
- Themes
- I know by heart Renton's rant in Trainspotting where he says "It's shite being Scottish [...] we've been colonized by wankers." etc. (and I admit liking to recite it in full accent) In the 1960s, a current of thought in the nationalist intelligentsia emerged which portrayed Quebec as a "colony" of Canada (indeed, Quebec was conquered, colonized, annexed, the French-speakers were discriminated and had the lowest jobs, the English and the exterior controlled the economy...). It is less used today, but it still exists, and some people call "être colonisé" the state of a Quebecer who is submissive to Canada. How much is that a current of thought in Scotland nationalists? Did its "popularity" change as well over time?
- Grievances
- Can you paint me a portrait of some of the major "injustices" suffered by Scotland from England throughout history from the nationalist point of view?
- Regions
- Regions in Quebec have political tendencies: example, Saguenay is the most sovereigntist and the Outaouais one of the least. The English Montreal's West Island is Sovereignty's no man's land. Montreal is the center of progressivism while Quebec City is more conservative. What about Scotland? Also, is there a difference between urban and rural areas in independence support?
- In Quebec, the television, cinema and arts industry is massively concentrated in Montreal. Little is left to Quebec City and the regions. Close to no television show and few films happen outside of the Montreal region. There is a rivalry bewteen the two cities and there is a feeling Montreal is sometimes centered on itself. What is the situation for Glasgow and Edinburgh?
- Internal allies
- In Quebec, traditional allies of independence are trade unions, artists and entertainers, the left-wigners, the youth. Traditional opponents are the financial circle, right-wigners, the old ("you'll lose your pensions!" they tell them) and regretfully our Anglo-Quebecer compatriots. What about Scotland?
- Foreign allies
- The major foreign ally for Quebec sovereigntists has of course been France. That all began with President Charles De Gaulle's famous Vive le Québec libre! in 1967). In overt diplomacy, the government has since kept the doctrine of so-called "non-interference, non-indifference" and it deals with Quebec's government and Premier in a nation-to-nation relationship. Despite the dominating social democracy in Quebec sovereigntism, the French right-wing and Gaullists (obviously) have sometimes been warmer. Outside France, sympathy is rare, especially in governments, of course. All American governments from Carter to Clinton expressed a preference for Canadian unity but did not interfere in a major way. Does Scottish independence have international allies? How is the foreign popular sympathy for it? I would imagine at least a bunch of Americans who'd be warm to the idea.
- Foreign relations
- I saw a picture of Jack McConnell with George W. Bush. Is relationships between the Scottish government and sovereign governments frequent? Are there attempts from London to hamper this?
BoNM
edit
Pour votre dévouement au développement du savoir au sujet du Québec dans le monde anglophone, pour votre fidélité à l'Amérique française et la patrie de vos ancêtres, pour votre travail altruiste en tant que citoyen d'un territoire externe, pour votre défense courageuse d'articles apparentés au Québec (par exemple List of Quebec television series et Quebec bashing), je vous décerne fièrement la Quebec Barnstar of National Merit.
Liberlogos 06:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Deconstructing a myth
editThe rules of Wikipedia commending removal of non-sovereign nationalities for the superstructural reference... Is it the case? No. This is why.
The Rules
editNow, WP:MOS itself already begins to guide us by noting that "the following quotation from The Chicago Manual of Style is worth considering: Rules and regulations such as these, in the nature of the case, cannot be endowed with the fixity of rock-ribbed law. They are meant for the average case, and must be applied with a certain degree of elasticity." Ah, but WP:MOSBIO tells us: "Nationality (In the normal case this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen or national, [...]" So much is contained in a simple word: "normal", like in the word "average". As one reviews the talk that lead to such a construct, one notices (at Talk:WP:MOSBIO) that it was adopted specifically to address this type of issue, leaving this essential elasticity for things such as non-sovereign nationality. The ethnicity part was to clear up problems such as one issue with a user who insisted in having Jennifer Aniston described as Greek. However, "Quebec" is not a ethnicity and "Quebec is a civic nation, not an ethnic nation."... says one Michael Ignatieff, yesterday in The Globe and Mail (as have done before Benoît Pelletier, Bernard Landry, etc., etc.)
The precedents
editNon-sovereign nationality is tolerated and encouraged across Wikipedia.
- Ewan McGregor "is a Scottish actor who has had significant success in mainstream, indie and art house films."
- Craig Ferguson is a Scottish Emmy-nominated actor, film director, screenwriter, comedian, composer, and novelist. He is the current host of The Late Late Show, broadcast on CBS.
- Sean Connery (a Scottish nationalist, or "sovereigntist" in Quebec parlance) "is an Oscar-winning Scottish actor and producer who is also well-known for his portrayal of James Bond."
- Jack McConnell (a Scottish unionist, or "federalist" in Quebec parlance) "is a Scottish politician, leader of the Labour Party in Scotland and the third and current First Minister of Scotland."
- Francesc Macià i Llussà "was a Catalan soldier, politician and President of the Generalitat (Catalan government)."
- Lluís Companys i Jover "was a Catalan politician and leader of the Esquerra Party (Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya)."
- Josep Irla i Bosch "was a Catalan politician."
- Josep Tarradellas i Joan "was a Catalan politician."
- Juan José Ibarretxe "is a Basque politician."
- Yungchen Lhamo "is a Tibetan singer living in exile in New York City."
- I Muvrini "is a Corsican folk music group who sing traditional Corsican music in their native Corsican language."
- Mustafa Barghouti "is a Palestinian democracy activist."
- Maurice Kenney "is a Mohawk poet."
- Delby Powless "is a Mohawk lacrosse player from the Six Nations of the Grand River Indian reserve near Brantford, Ontario."
- Zachary Ittimangnaq "is an Inuit actor who portrayed the character Ootek in the 1983 film Never Cry Wolf."
- Paula Gunn Allen "is a Native American poet, literary critic, activist and novelist."
- etc.
And even with ethnicity...
- Ron Karenga, "also known as Ron Everett, is an African American author and Marxist political activist, best known as the founder of Kwanzaa, a week-long celebration first observed in California from December 26, 1966, to January 1, 1967."
- Elizabeth Catlett Mora "is an African American sculptress and printmaker."
- William Kristol "is a Jewish American neoconservative thinker, inspired in part by the ideas of Leo Strauss."
- Joe Pesci, "is an Italian-American Academy Award-winning actor, comedian and singer who is often typecast as a violent mobster or grouchy funnyman."
- etc.
The situation
editIt is highly preferable to have an encyclopedia that reflects true reality, that considers it before "officiality". Those initially opposed to the position I am exposing are probably the first to strongly agree on this. But this argues for the sociological national identity, even if non-sovereign, to be regarded. Wikipedia has this strength of having access to the reality from within societies from its international contributors, and it must harbour it. We know that if people wait for the authorities to reflect the reality of society, one will wait a while (and have before).
"Quebecer", "Quebecois", "Quebec", beyond any "nation" debate, indicates the social grouping in which this individual most often acquired the tapestry of his being, inscribed her or himself into the world fabric and left the center of the imprint of her or his legacy. The social reality of a distinct society is central to the discussion about a subject.
So, what is the sociological reality in Quebec? An vast majority of Quebecers consider Quebec a nation (75% to 85% from what I'm reading) and therefor Quebecer a nationality. A majority consider themselves "Quebecers only" or "Quebecers first". If it were up to themselves, Quebec would be recognized a nation in the Canadian constitution. The only people stopping this are Canadians; why should they, of all peoples on Earth, be those with the supreme authority to judge the nature of this Quebec people, before anyone else and before Quebecers themselves? Their own National Assembly of Quebec has affirmed solemnly that Quebec was a nation on repeated occasions, as Prime Minister of Canada Harper has reminded us again recently.
Furthermore, WP:MOS tells us that "[w]here known, use terminology that subjects use for themselves (self-identification). This can mean using the term an individual uses for himself or herself, or using the term a group most widely uses for itself." It also suggests to "[u]se specific terminology".
Neutrality
editQuebecer is the neutral form. In Quebec, someone saying they're a Quebecer is a Citizen of Quebec. Someone saying they're a Canadian is a federalist Citizen of Quebec. But also, as exposed in the "Precedents" section, considering the sociological sphere (what some call "nation") of the subject and identifying it is a wide custom on Wikipedia and elsewhere. Treating Quebec differently from these other nations while the "national" consciousness there is often equal or stronger is called being biased.
So to the person who would still wish to challenge the "Quebecer" denomination, I cordially enjoin them to make on WikipediaDaniel O'Connell a British political leader, Sean Connery a British actor, Alex Salmond a British politician and Yasser Arafat an Israeli politician. When this user has reached the consensus with the articles' respective authors to keep these changes, people like me will be happy to reconsider this position. --Liberlogos 23:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Gala de l'ADISQ
editLiberlogos/Le Grand Fourre-Tout Liberlogos/Le Grand Fourre-Tout