Introduction
“I would rather see a sovereign Quebec that respected freedoms, respected rights, than see a federalistic Quebec that violates freedoms, that puts fanaticism as an instrument of government policy.”
-- William Johnson [1]
I find the title of your book unsettling.
You should.
I want Canada to end. To dissolve. I want Quebec to separate from Canada and
become an independent nation.
I want what remains of Canada -- the other nine provinces -- to go their
separate ways, jointly or severally. I want it done legally and democratically,
but I want it done.
And please note: I go way beyond what the traditional separatist wants, who is
always keen to emphasize that he doesn’t want to break up Canada but, rather,
have Quebec become a separate, independent nation that will be a neighbour to a
still-intact Canada.
Gosh. What’s made you so bitter and angry towards the land of your birth?
Canada stood by and not only allowed but enabled a thriving, prosperous
community of loyal Canadians to be shattered: the minority Anglophone community
of Quebec.
There is a price to pay for displacing my friends, breaking up families, and
idly standing by while our rights were violated. Canada permitted what occurred
and it is Canada that should pay.
That sounds way overboard. Certainly, no country is perfect…but has it been
that terrible? Isn’t there anything good you can say about Canada?
Canada is a fine and wonderful concept. There are many great things to
appreciate and enjoy as a citizen of this county. However, there are concepts
that are superior to the concept of Canada. One of these is the supremacy of
individual rights and freedoms. If Anglophone Quebecers' rights and freedoms
must continually be compromised in order to maintain the concept of Canada -- as
has been the case up to now -- a reevaluation of priorities is in order.
Canada must yield to human rights and not vice-versa. If there has to be a
choice, it is Canada that must be compromised for individual rights and not
individual rights for Canada. When values are in conflict, it is the lesser that
must yield to the greater.
In the following pages I will outline why I have come to this conclusion.
So you're promoting the principle of individual rights "at any cost" and
claim that you've found a way to do it, even if it means sacrificing Canada?
Yes.
Canada uber alles? No. The individual uber alles. All else must yield to this
higher principle, even the country itself.
And obtaining full individual and minority rights for Quebec Anglophones
necessitates the dismantling of Canada?
I have reached the conclusion that the only way to achieve that goal is via
Quebec independence which, geographically, necessitates the severing of Canada
in the middle. This will inevitably lead to the end of Canada because a house
divided in the middle cannot stand.
So you’re now a separatist?
I am a qualified, conditional separatist. I want to bring a set of values to the
table that will become part and parcel of the new Quebec nation I will endorse
and help create. I will attempt to create the Canada I want to have and that
should have been. But in an independent Quebec. This is what I present in this
book.
How did you arrive at the point at which Canada is no longer tenable?
Once you have examined the evidence and solution I present in this book I
believe that you'll arrive at the same conclusion: Canada must end.
I give those reasons in the first section titled Why.
The great malaise of this country is that we have forgotten -- or have chosen to
ignore -- the elements of our national will, the real glue of nations.
Glue?
Those sacred principles and values men and women hold highest. Borne of the mind
stuff of consciousness, these principles hold a nation together.
Instead of putting these ideals first, we have embraced premises that are
fundamentally flawed, historically inaccurate, and morally bankrupt. Yet, we
have chosen to act from this level.
Knowledge is the basis of action. Incomplete, imbalanced knowledge leads to
unsuccessful action which often manifests as fear and manipulation. This
unacceptable situation has brought us to the point at which the status quo is
characterized by half values and untruths. This is no longer tenable and demands
a reordering of our values.
I noticed that the subtitle of the book is How to achieve Quebec
independence.
That’s the second half, the How section, in which I provide a formula that the
Quebec National Assembly can adopt that will enable a majority “yes” vote in the
next independence referendum.
Quebec separatists have tried, unsuccessfully, on two different occasions to
obtain independence through referendums. Indeed, they asked “soft” questions and
couldn‘t get a majority “yes.” How do you propose to succeed where they failed?
My formula will succeed and it asks a hard and unambiguous referendum question,
just as the Clarity Act requires. At the heart of its success will be an
exchange.
What exchange?
Something I call the 20% non-francophone “no” block vote will be exchanged for
full individual and minority rights for Quebec‘s non-francophones. By
neutralizing this block vote, a clear “yes” majority in the next referendum will
be achieved.
The referendum formula I have designed is called the Two Question Referendum. It
is the main focus of the How section.
What will happen to the Anglophones in this independent Quebec you envision?
Most of Quebec’s Anglophones and allophones (i.e. “non-francophones”) will find
themselves in a geographic area that will become a province within an
independent Quebec. However, all of Quebec’s current territory will maintain its
integrity and separate intact.
I must say, this book of yours is going to have to do a lot of convincing
before I’ll get to the point at which I’d want a fine country like Canada to
dissolve.
Read it and weep.
---