I normally don't blog about non-social conservative issues, but the subject of Canadian unity is dear to my heart.
A little background about me: I grew up Anglo in Quebec City. I was involved in Quebec provincial politics in my university days. I fought for the NO side in the 1995 referendum.
I wanted to respond to Werner Patel's post as we well as Catprint in the Mash. (Sorry, fuddle duddle wouldn't load for me, I would have liked to have read that post, too).
Werner writes:
Thanks to Ignatieff, everyone, Conservatives and Liberals alike, will have that nation thing flung in their faces by Quebecers from now on. Stretching it further, it is not at all impossible that this revived debate could bring the Parti Québécois that long-awaited victory in the next provincial election. Quebecers would then be called to a referendum on the future of the country yet again.
(...)
But this will not please the rest of Canada, particularly Western Canada. People in the West will be furious - and alienated - again because of Québec making demands and bellyaching and because of the special treatment it will receive as a result no doubt.
When that happens - not if - the West, which is already the strongest force in Canada now, will no longer be in a weakened position the way it was during the previous constitutional crises revolving around Québec.
I could not agree with him more. Michael Ignatieff does not have a sound understanding of the dynamics of the situation in Quebec. He is on the outside. Jean Chrétien, for all his flaws, understood the correct principle: do not pander to separatists. You give them an inch, they will take a yard. And if this happens, it will only enflame Western alienation.
I have often thought about how conservative Alberta culture has been patently treated unfairly, even if I didn't always agree with the general zeitgeist of the place. But my agreement or disgareement is not the issue. The point is that Alberta gets sucked for all its resource money, then gets told by cental Canadian elitists, in so many words, that its input is not valued.
There's a recipe for separatism.
Werner also writes in another post:
Unlike the federal states of the United States of America, there is very little cohesion between and among Canada’s provinces and territories – particularly when it comes to Québec and Alberta.
I agree to a certain extent. Canada does have some cohesion. But I do think that the things that unite us are strongly CBC- and government- driven.
Instead of finding ever new ways to please (or offend) Québec, or any other alienated part of Canada, we should be looking for ways to increase the cohesion between and among the provinces - in other words, to make that fiction “Canada” a reality at long last.
Absolutely, but...
If the Liberals are serious about renewal, they will take a completely new approach, such as electing a Western Canadian as their leader.
There's where I strongly disagree.
The problem is that politics or government cannot solve this issue. This is a cultural issue. The reason why Quebec and Alberta want to separate has less to do with the governments than the way people perceive themselves and their values.
You can put any kind of government in power in Ottawa, and there will still be separatism. Why? Because it does not have its roots in the federal government.
The reason why federalism is weak in Quebec is because of the almost complete absence of federalist culture. For whatever reason, there are practically no federalists in the cultural industries-- no one exploring issues of what it means to be Canadian in their own terms, on their own dime. Whatever discussion of Canada there is in Quebec, it's subsidized by the Federal Government. It's artificial.
What there needs to be is a bunch of Quebec cultural producers deciding, on their own initiative, to write about their Canadian experience. They have to produce their own cohesion. They have to produce a history, a literature, a body of film and television, a public discourse that unites people in their identification with Canada.
The same thing applies to Alberta.
The problem is, the discourse about Canada has long been dominated by that whole Trudeauist ideal. And if you didn't share it, you weren't a true Canadian. I remember that attitude so vividly when I was a kid. So what happens if you're not a supporter of universal health care, bilingualism, centralization, and so forth?
You are not considered a real Canadian.
That message is pervasive in the culture. This is what fires separatism. If you do not agree, you do not belong.
In order for there to be cohesion in a culture, there has to be shared narratives-- religion (e.g. the Gospels), history, literary, pop culture, etc. We have to have these internalized "myths" to bind us, so that we have approximately the same cultural references, and the same values so that we can build a political culture based on that.
The differences between Quebec and Alberta in terms of references are positively astronomical.
But the only way for this cohesion to be achieved is for Quebeckers and Albertans (and other Canadians) to develop it for themselves and then have a kind of cultural dialogue so that we can build on what already exists to make Canadian national narratives.
The United States is a country that, while very regional, is anchored in nataional narratives. That's what we need.
The thing is: we can't legislate this. The moment government funds this, it, in essence, becomes propaganda. Government cannot solve this problem.
One question that follows from this is: are there are any Quebec and Alberta cultural producers out there who love Canada enough to develop these themes in their work?
I think the future of the country hinges on them.
