Fight separatism: Throw out the Liberals (David "Axis of Evil" Frum calls Martin's Quebec bluff!)

Fight separatism: Throw out the Liberals

David Frum
National Post
Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Well, you have to give the Liberals marks for audacity.

First they launch a scheme of embezzlement, extortion and graft in Quebec.

Then, when they get caught, they warn that any attempt to hold them accountable for their wrongdoing will divide Quebec from the rest of Canada. They say that these are "dangerous times," that their opponents seek to "divide Canada" or -- in the words of the Prime Minister himself -- that any election will present Canadians with a choice between "separatists and federalists."

We've all heard the old joke about the man who murders his parents and ask the court's mercy because he is an orphan. The Liberals have gone him one better: They're like a man who murders his parents and then accuses the court that punishes him of threatening the sacred unity of the family.

The truth is this: The surest way to halt any rise in separatism in Quebec is for English Canadians to inflict the most massive possible defeat on the Liberal party.

Suppose English Canadians follow the advice of Joe Volpe, Scott Brison and the Prime Minister. Suppose they vote Liberal in the name of "national unity" and re-elect a government apprehended in the act of using public funds to enrich itself and manipulate Quebec's political process. What message will Quebecers take from such a result?

Won't they take the message that English-speaking Canada has accepted and ratified the wrongdoing revealed by Justice John Gomery's inquiry?

Won't they take the message that English Canadians accept that corruption and gangsterism are acceptable political tactics so long as the targets of corruption and gangsterism are Quebecois?

Won't they take the message that the integrity of Quebec democracy is perpetually at risk so long as Quebec remains within Canada?

Right now, Quebecers' justified outrage against Liberal wrongdoing is directed exactly where it belongs: against the Liberals. But if the Liberals succeed in persuading English Canada to link the ideal of "national unity" with the reality of Liberal graft, Quebecers' outrage will be redirected away from one corrupt party to the country that goes on re-electing and re-electing that corrupt party.

If an election were held today, the Bloc Quebecois' seat total could rise from 54 to 60 or more. But if 54 seats is not enough to divide Canada, it seems hard to imagine how 60 seats could do the job. Nothing that has happened thus far makes another referendum more likely or alters the hard underlying fact that a majority of Quebecers wish to keep a place within the Canadian Confederation.

But it is possible to imagine events that could change Quebecers' minds, and at the head of that list is the re-election of a sullied Liberal government. A Liberal re-election would prove that not even the most dramatic revelations of criminality can produce change in Canada's frozen federal system. It would prove that Canadian politics is irredeemably dysfunctional. And finally a Liberal re-election would vividly demonstrate to Quebecers that the political gap between Quebec and the rest of Canada has opened unbridgeably wide. The case for dramatic protest by Quebecers would become unanswerable: a third referendum, a "oui" vote. All the federalists' promises of reform and renewal would be exposed as lies, and the very idea of Canada discredited as a sordid excuse for partisan plundering.

I do not believe that any of those horrible eventualities will come to pass. I believe that Canadian voters will disregard the veiled blackmail of the Liberal party and vote for integrity in government. I believe that the Martin government will be badly beaten in every region of the country. And I believe that under a new system of government, a lot of Canada's most intractable problems will suddenly look a great deal more manageable.

The Liberals have marketed themselves since the early 1970s as the only party that could defend Canada against the threat of separatism. The Liberals have ruled for all but 10 of the last 35 years. Yet year after year they continue to insist that the threat of separatism remains as acute as ever. Some defence!

In reality, the Liberals and the separatists are codependents. Without the separatists, the Liberals would have no excuse for their abuses. Without Liberal centralization and misgovernment, the separatists would have no justification for their otherwise unattractive cause. The separatists and the Liberals need each other. Each in their own way, they both profit from the perpetual crisis in the Canadian Confederation. Together they have collaborated to produce a long succession of such crises.

Separatists and Liberals have prospered together. By now it should be clear that they can only be defeated together.

So don't be deceived by the Liberals' menaces. You want to save Canada? Vote against those who have disgraced Canada.

© National Post 2005

Exactly. A lot of people in Quebec, even many who aren't leftists, have parked their votes with the Bloc in the name of defending Quebec's interests. The majority of French-speaking Quebecois want to remain in Canada. They want an equal partnership. They will leave Canada if they're treated like they're not wanted but it will take a lot to make the separatist cause an accomplished fact. It is indeed the Liberals who have undermined with corruption and graft, the unity of Canada. Now English-speaking Canada has a decision to make about whether to continuing its reward of the greatest single gift the separatists have had up til now: the Liberals whose decades long rule destroyed a nation's trust.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)

In many respects I agree with you.

IMHO, most English Canadians make 2 fundamental errors when trying to comprehend Quebec:
1. They see Montrealers as representative of all Quebecers which is as realistic and makes about as much sense as forming an opinion of English Canada based upon Torontonians.
2. They're seemingly incapable of differentiating between the relatively small group of hardcore separatists and the far larger one of nationalists.
Given that most English Canadians exhibit little or no pride in their own language, history and culture, it's hardly surprising that they have great difficulty in relating to Francophones who are willing to stand up for themselves in these areas.

Along with shameless pandering, divide and conquer and playing various groups off against each other have long been standard liberal operating procedures on both sides of the border. As they're now well on their way to losing large vote blocks like the Blacks and French respectively, both are now heavily into playing their all too familiar evil games within assorted immigrant communities.

So Frum's a Canadian again, eh? Does he sneak into a phone booth at Niagara Falls, change passports, put on a Mountie uniform and cross the border? How to keep track of these things?

As a New Englander I hope Kebbekk does seceed: we'll get the Atlantic Maritime Provinces! I have my eyes on a nice chunk of New Brunswick...mmm...Salmon...

No more $400 a day "Guide Fees" that American landowners are forced to pay to locals to fish in their own back yards, often in waters they own as well. Socialsm stinks.

"Could Martin lose his riding to a BQ candidate?"

DISTRICT: LaSalle-Émard
Paul Martin LIB 25806 56.55%
Thierry Larrivée BQ 14001 30.68%
Nicole Roy-Arcelin CPC 2271 4.97%
Rebecca Blaikie NDP 1995 4.37%
Douglas Jack GREEN 1000 2.2%
Marc-Boris St-Maurice MP 349 0.77%
Jean-Paul Bédard ML 210 0.46%

Conclusion: while anything's possible ....

One of the more powerful pieces of punditry I've read this year.

The game is over, it's time for the reckoning up North.

Any talk of arrests and prosecutions of the major politicians and backroom shakers up North yet?

Good point.

In some rural Quebec ridings, the Conservatives were either a respectable (for Quebec standards) third - or even second in a couple (behind the Bloc Quebecois). The key is to ensure that they become the voice of federalism, and to try to make Quebec embrace Catholic values once more (they did until the mid-1960s with the Quiet Revolution). All is not lost; it is unfortunate that the separatists tend to be the rural and small town people, who have the most to gain in a united North America. Nothing says that they need to give up French if they became a US state (there are no official languages in the US). The big problems tend to lie in the big cities, especially Montreal (North America's most liberal city).

hey're seemingly incapable of differentiating between the relatively small group of hardcore separatists and the far larger one of nationalists.

True. The main reason for Brian Mulroney's overwhelming victory in 1984 was his recognition of the distinction and his ability to work with the nationalists. Prior to his win Québec tended to go overwhelmingly Liberal, a phenomenon that he was able to reverse almost overnight.

There is an article in this morning's WSJ about how difficult the US is making it for Quebec loggers to log Maine's forests. It seems that the feds will only give them visas for six months at a time. Maybe Maine should invite some of the WA State loggers that the environmentalists have put out of work to move to Canada and keep the Frenchies out altogether.

David Frum hit the right notes. The truth is that it's the Anglophones in Canada that are keeping the libs in Canada. The Anglophone CDN freepers just do not have the guts here to admit that so they like to blame Quebec. English Canada has a choice, either they keep Canada united by ditching the lieberals or they re-elect them and break up the country. Quebeckers no longer want the libs in their lives unlike the rest of Canada.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.