Filibuster CartoonsTitle: Jack's shadow (click to view)
Date: May 30, 2011
When I talk to foreigners about Canadian politics, I notice there's often some surprise when I mention how Quebec is the most left-wing part of our country.
"Quebec?" they say, "but I thought they were so nationalistic?" To many, the notion of strong, European-derived nationalist movements still conjures images of right-wing ethnocentrism and reactionary traditionalism. By definition, what could be more conservative than trying to
conserve the sovereignty of the homeland in the face of corrupting foreign influences?
And there was a time when Quebec nationalism was, in fact, very conservative. From Confederation to the early decades of the 20th Century, when French-Canadians were still likely to define their identify through their Ultramontanist brand of Catholicism, nationalist scholars and rabble-rousers were usually those who believed their province to be far more godly and moral than the heathen Protestant bloc to which it was attached. For much of Canadian history, Quebec was thus the place where progressive reform movements, such as female suffrage and secular education, went to die after sweeping the rest of the country, and a place whose voters were notoriously suspicious of all but the most ostentatiously religious and chauvinistic politicians. As a popular French expression of the time went,
le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge, or, "heaven is blue (Conservative) and hell is red (Liberal)."
After World War II, Quebec ditched its religiosity with great speed, but not its distrust of the Canadian state. As Quebecers became more secular and socialist in outlook, the source of Canada-scepticism merely shifted. Rather than resent the Anglo community beyond their borders for its decadence and sin, the new narrative began to argue that
capitalism was Canada's true corruptor, and a new oppressive, taunting danger for the province to avoid.
The radical Quebec separatist terrorists of the 1960s were all Marxist in outlook, angry men who saw common cause in the Soviet-backed nationalist libertarian movements of Algeria and Anglo, whose tactics, style, and rhetoric they deliberately emulated. In true leftist fashion, they viewed Quebec's prior embrace of the Church as merely a prolonged period of drowsiness under the opiate of the masses, and one which had been deliberately encouraged by Anglo-Canadian imperialism in order to keep their French subjects poor and stupid. A truly free Quebec would be independent of
all reactionary systems of oppression, both economic and cultural.
Vive la revolution!
We've obviously come a long way from the 1960s, and even the most ardent Quebec separatist is nowhere near as uncompromising or militant as they were in the era of the October Crisis. Yet the idea that separatism should be a primarily left-wing movement remains strong. The country's two establishment separatist parties, the federal Bloc Quebecois and its provincial ally, the Parti Quebecois, are both proudly social democratic in ideology, and usually campaign (and in the PQ's case, rule) in a manner to the considerable left of the Canadian mainstream. I'd argue that the legacy of all this hasn't been that great: since Quebec politicians rarely meet a social welfare project they don't like, but still feel someone else should pay for, the province has the dubious distinction of being both the country's most indebted and most subsidized province, with an economy buckling under the weight of endless programs seeking to give its citizenry the cheapest and most expansive state-run schools, electricity, daycare, and medicine in North America.
Regardless, it's in this context that the NDP has long remained so frustrated with Quebec. As the most far-left of the country's three major parties, they felt themselves to be the obvious no-brainer choice for French-Canadians, though the French-Canadians themselves seemed to disagree, supporting every party
but the NDP in successive election cycles.
Until now, that is. The New Democrats' unprecedented sweep of Quebec in this month's federal election caught everyone by surprise,including the NDP itself. If anything, the victory has raised all sorts of unease over as to whether the sweep was too much of a good thing, considering the historically nationalist predilections of Quebec voters. Since there's no real evidence to suggest separatism has disappeared from the political conversation in the province — the PQ is still the odds-on favourite to win the next provincial election — the unavoidable conclusion is that the NDP victory was hoisted on the shoulders of many sovereignist voters, who, for once, were looking for a
non-Bloc, social-democratic alternative. Non-Bloc, but, critically, not necessarily non-separatist.
Since Jack Layton wants to become prime minister someday, he's thus in a bit of a bind. Either appease his new, soft-on-separatism base with token gestures and friendly talk, or take the hardline stance in the opposite direction, as he's always claimed to favor.
This week we received the first glimpse that Layton has the former approach in mind when
he stated that he believed a "50% plus one" majority vote in a separation referendum would be a sufficient pretext for Quebec to leave Canada. This is an attitude that has traditionally been long opposed by all "federalist" parties in the country, who have argued that, at best, only a much more clear majority vote will suffice. This was the logic behind the so-called 2000 "Clarity Act" of the Jean Chretien administration, which stated that only once a "clear majority" of Quebecers vote on a "clear question" of separation will the federal government even
begin the discussion as to what happens next.
By taking a contrary stance on this once proudly settled issue facing the Canadian political establishment, Layton has chosen to position himself in an ideological space unclaimed since the departure of Lucien Bouchard, a fellow cane-wielding opposition leader who, from 1993 to 1996, served as the first openly separatist politician to hold that office.
Which is not to say it's necessarily a political blunder on Layton's part. Many far-left, NDP-friendly groups in English Canada already tend to support Quebec's "right to decide" with similarly low standards, so the chances of the old base being scandalized at this open courtship of the new base seems low.
But there's a reason the NDP has never formed government in Canada, and none of the explanations include the phrases "not left-wing enough" or "too hard on separatism." Jack has doubtlessly formed himself a nice little coalition, but whether it's one that has a chance to rule Canada I will leave up to the reader.
CKA Uber 
