Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

When did it turn into "sovereigntist"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Places » Canada Donate to DU
 
jim3775 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 09:53 PM
Original message
When did it turn into "sovereigntist"?
Did I miss a memo or something? Is separatist a dirty word now?

Looking at the definition of both words, they certainly provide a cover for opposite points of view; sovereign is defined as “complete independence and self-government,” and separation is defined as “the act of dividing or disconnecting”.

I’m going to stick with separatist, unless someone can provide me a good reason not to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Maple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 09:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well see, all those people
defending 'English Canada'... can't speak the language. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, this could be interesting....
is this in reference to the controversy surrounding the new Governor general?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LosinIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. ummm, didn't Bowie sing about that?
back from sovereigntist's city???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Hee hee, close enough for a good life!
should that "t" after the "n" be there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
getmeouttahere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Geez, I meant good "laugh" I swear!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LosinIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. probably not, I just cut and pasted it
cause I wasn't sure wtf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jim3775 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. Thanks for the information, you are all very helpful
Edited on Fri Aug-19-05 10:17 PM by jim3775
/:sarcasm:

Jeez, why all the snark? Separatist was the accepted term nationally and internationally leading up to and after the referendum. Why has it changed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canadian Socialist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. No snark
really. I think that "separatism" went out of vogue, then sovereignist became the new meme. Just because it sounds better. :::shrug::: I guess it doesn't sound so divisive. YMMV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
achtung_circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
9. Long story short,
Edited on Fri Aug-19-05 10:41 PM by achtung_circus
when it was apparent that complete separation, and a clear question, would result in definite loss of the last referendum by the Pequistes the story was spun.

Instead of separation, we would have sovereignty/association. There would be close ties, Residents of the new nation of Quesbec would continue to be issued Canadian passports (ha, ha) and Quebec would use the Canadian dollar. After the last referendum the matter was referred to the Supreme Court in the form of the "Clarity Act".

More here:
<http://www.law.ualberta.ca/ccskeywords/sovereignty.html>

‘Sovereignty-association’ is one manifestation of Quebec separatism. It calls for political independence and an ongoing economic partnership with Canada. Conceptualized by René Lévesque, ‘sovereignty-association’ was the centrepiece of the Parti Québécois' (PQ) secessionist platform during the years Lévesque led the party (1968-85). ‘Sovereignty-association’ was intended to increase the strength of the independence movement by calming fears that a political divorce from Canada would deliver tough economic times to the people of Quebec. Lévesque's political instincts were shrewd. In the 1970s Quebec public opinion polls consistently reported that people were more likely to support political independence if it included maintaining an economic partnership with Canada.

A mandate to negotiate ‘sovereignty-association’ was the subject of the 1980 Quebec referendum, the first Quebec referendum on sovereignty. Premier Lévesque sought majority support from Quebec voters to negotiate the terms of ‘sovereignty-association’ with Canada. The results of those negotiations would be put to the public in a second referendum.

In a 1979 position paper the PQ stated that sovereignty-association should include free trade between Canada and Quebec, common tariffs against imports, and a common currency. New joint Quebec-Canada political institutions were proposed to govern these economic arrangements. Various English Canadian political leaders declared that they would not negotiate an economic association with a sovereign Quebec. These declarations generally are conceded to have contributed to the decisive defeat the separatists suffered in the 1980 referendum.

In the 1990s, the idea that an economic association with Canada must be a condition of Quebec independence waned in popularity. The question posed in the 1995 referendum only stipulated that Quebec should offer a new economic and political partnership to Canada before declaring independence. Canada's acceptance was not a prerequisite for sovereignty. Unlike in 1980, the separatists lost this second referendum by the narrowest of margins (50.6 percent to 49.4 percent) (see secession).

Submitted by Ian Urquhart
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jim3775 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Thank you
You answered my question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 08:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Canada Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC