I’m all for that as well.

I’m an ardent defender of cultural diversity, rather than a French supremacist (as some might suspect). That’s why French trumps (if I can use the term) English for me pretty much anywhere in North America, but Huron trumps French in my book in Wendake for example, which is a Quebec City suburb populated by Hurons. If they want all their signs to be in Huron and restrict the use of French in their community – go for it. I won’t feel slighted just because my language, with which I do identify strongly, is French, and even though French has been spoken in the Quebec City area for 400 years. I can deal with French being curtailed for the benefit of Huron (or another aboriginal language elsewhere) because I know that, in the long run, RDS will still be in French, Le Soleil will still be in French, Université Laval will still be producing graduates in French, etc. And that the hill Huron has to climb is pretty darn steep.

That’s why I just don’t get the attitude of certain anglos with respect to the protection of French on a larger scale in Quebec. The power of English on this continent (even in Quebec) and in the world is just so massive, that their hostility can only be explained by the fact that some people just can’t stand the idea that there is still one small corner of the continent where it isn’t (yet) dominant. It really can’t be anything else, unfortunately.

Great idea! Sure, a Cree domain, no problem. A good idea; justice and respect for everyone! When one believes in justice, one holds it *above* their own interests, something more people in majority and/or powerful groups should understand if we want to progress in this world (like in Canada, France, China, Spain, Britain; and with males, white people, straight people…).

By the way, there are domains for non-sovereign entities like Catalonia, (.cat), Greenland (.gl), the American Samoa (.as), even Asia (.asia). And there are movements to establish domains for Britanny (.bzh), Wales (.cym), Galicia (.gal), Scotland (.sco), Latin America and its diaspora (.lat), New York City (.nyc) and Berlin (.berlin)!

@Acajack

Yup. Reminds me of a quote of a British politician during the Irish independence struggle of the beginning of the 20th century, who in other words said “If only we had agreed to Home Rule”.

I’ve heard it suggested before that Bill 101 should be put in the Constitution (the Canadian one… actually the only one).

The problem is that with every constitutional failure, the stakes get higher. I’m not sure that the majority of rabble-rousers in Quebec would today be satisfied with just Bill 101 in the Constitution. They might have been placated by such a move 10 or 15 years ago, but today it wouldn’t be perceived as nearly enough. (Especially given all the publicity recently over the law’s alleged ineffectiveness.)

When the Meech crisis was on, I told everyone I knew: they’d better pass Meech if they know what’s good for them, because next-time-round there’s going to be a lot more than a flimsy distinct society clause on the table. Meech died largely because labelling Quebec a distinct society (and giving it a handful of new powers) was too much for the ROC to swallow, and where are we now? Yippee, we’re now calling Quebec a ‘nation’, which by any dictionary’s measure is dangerously close to calling it a country. And we’re also (sooner than people think) eventually going to be debating, together as Canadians, what this nation status for Quebec actually means with respect to the division of powers between Ottawa and Quebec City. Sounds like fun, doesn’t it?

Does anyone miss distinct society now?

For all of humanity`s faults and historical errors, I trust the people far more than I`d trust some king or queen who has power based on what? Lineage? Sorry, man. I’ll take my chances with the people any day.

Of course, democracy is an imperfect system since it was devised by the imperfect creature that is the homo sapiens. None of democracy`s supporters have any illusions about it being perfect, but to bring forward George W. Bush’s presidency as an example of the failure of republicanism (small r in this case) is a bit unfair. And although I abhor the guy and think he has done great damage to his country and much of the world, he`s hardly a tyrant. Actually, he ain`t smart enough to be a tyrant…

Monarchists like to say that the Crown is a good ‘check and balance`, but what happens if we get a rogue monarch instead of a rogue president? Then what? Well, the monarchists usually answer no worries, Parliament would just abolish the monarchy or censure the monarch to rein him in.

OK, but so what`s the use of a monarchy if Parliament is still the supreme level of power?

Tourism?

I was told, by those I was arguing with, that I was giving the federalists too much credit, that they would oppose anything that seeked to distinguish Quebec from Canada, however non-threatening it really was.

It looks like I’m losing that argument. Domain names? really? That almost makes the size of lettering on commercial signage seem like a worthwhile cause.

Regarding the Queen and the monarchy in general…

Sure it has no relevance in everyday life in the ROC but just try and start a movement to abolish it and see what happens. Australians tried to get rid of the monarchy a few years ago and pretty much everyone expected the referendum on becoming a republic to pass like a knife through butter, but to everyone’s amazement the proposal was defeated and the monarchy was retained. This was in Australia, where if you know the place there is actually much overt hostility towards Britain and England in particular.

In Canada, in spite of the apparent contradiction with the image of modern Canada, a lot of people would be wary of getting rid of the monarchy, if only because many people are often desperate for symbolic stuff that distinguishes them from the U.S.

Predicted results for a referendum on abolishing the monarchy in Canada:

Quebec: 90% No / 10% Yes
ROC: 45% Yes / 55% Yes

Now wouldn’t that make for an interesting “morning after”?