Thursday, November 23, 2006

Quebec A Nation Pro and Con

The political Blogosphere in Canada has responded to the Conservative Governments motion that This House recognizes that Québécois form a nation within a united Canada. Lets see who is pro and con and undecided.

If you think I have placed you in the wrong catagory please let me know.

This is of course based upon postings on the Progressive Bloggers, Blogging Tories and the Canadian Blog Exchange aggregators as of the time of this posting.

And there is national unity here the Pro side recognizes the Quebecois as a historic nation, peoples, etc. The Con side declares itself for pure Federalism. Ah finally we can all talk to each other.

The management takes no responsibility for any underwear that gets tied in a knot.

Blogging Tories Pro

Why does the NDP support the Bloc's "nation" motion?

Yes, Quebec is a Nation. Live with it.

On nationhood, Part XVII

Quebecois called nation, world continues to spin

Call me anything you want, just not late for dinner...

Tories do the right thing.

Quebec Is A Nation Within A State

Nations within Nations

A KerPlonka! crash course in nationalism, OR: Why I'm unmoved by the overractive bleatings of many

Blogging Tories Con

Québec is NOT a Nation. Québec is a Province.

Much Ado About Nothing?

The Harper Bombshell

Quebec nation, Canada nothing

Blogging Tories Undecided

Political Staples

Nation: Pick a definition

Progressive Bloggers Pro

Harper: Québec a "nation within a united Canada"

Today, Canada is Stronger

Harper Acknowledges Quebecers Form Nation

Government to recognize Québec as a nation

Four Little Words

Québécois / Quebec Motion

Progressive Bloggers Con


Canada - A Nation of Masochists.....or a grouping of people....or an autonomous, what?

The Reviews Roll In!

So Much For Sanity

What happened to Federalism?

Progressive Bloggers Undecided

Harper Says Quebecers are a Nation Within Canada

Canada as a Country, Quebec as a Nation

Is the New Nation Proposal/Compromise a Harper Idea

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , ,


Anonymous said...

If anyone cares about my opinion, I'm kind of leaning against.

The more you feed this nationalism thing, the more you feed the separatism. It seems counter-intuitive, but that's the way it is.

Leave the issue alone.

scott said...

I am against this motion, eugene. When you throw bones to so-called "soft nationalists", it can only lead to greater demands.

In other words, when you begin to officially recognize smaller factions within a country as "nations", it is no longer symbolic and can only lead to further discussions of divisions [balkanization].